Skip to main content

Full text of "The works of Thomas Shepard, first pastor of the First Church, Cambridge, Mass."

See other formats


This  is  a  digital  copy  of  a  book  that  was  preserved  for  generations  on  library  shelves  before  it  was  carefully  scanned  by  Google  as  part  of  a  project 

to  make  the  world's  books  discoverable  online. 

It  has  survived  long  enough  for  the  copyright  to  expire  and  the  book  to  enter  the  public  domain.  A  public  domain  book  is  one  that  was  never  subject 

to  copyright  or  whose  legal  copyright  term  has  expired.  Whether  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  may  vary  country  to  country.  Public  domain  books 

are  our  gateways  to  the  past,  representing  a  wealth  of  history,  culture  and  knowledge  that's  often  difficult  to  discover. 

Marks,  notations  and  other  maiginalia  present  in  the  original  volume  will  appear  in  this  file  -  a  reminder  of  this  book's  long  journey  from  the 

publisher  to  a  library  and  finally  to  you. 

Usage  guidelines 

Google  is  proud  to  partner  with  libraries  to  digitize  public  domain  materials  and  make  them  widely  accessible.  Public  domain  books  belong  to  the 
public  and  we  are  merely  their  custodians.  Nevertheless,  this  work  is  expensive,  so  in  order  to  keep  providing  tliis  resource,  we  liave  taken  steps  to 
prevent  abuse  by  commercial  parties,  including  placing  technical  restrictions  on  automated  querying. 
We  also  ask  that  you: 

+  Make  non-commercial  use  of  the  files  We  designed  Google  Book  Search  for  use  by  individuals,  and  we  request  that  you  use  these  files  for 
personal,  non-commercial  purposes. 

+  Refrain  fivm  automated  querying  Do  not  send  automated  queries  of  any  sort  to  Google's  system:  If  you  are  conducting  research  on  machine 
translation,  optical  character  recognition  or  other  areas  where  access  to  a  large  amount  of  text  is  helpful,  please  contact  us.  We  encourage  the 
use  of  public  domain  materials  for  these  purposes  and  may  be  able  to  help. 

+  Maintain  attributionTht  GoogXt  "watermark"  you  see  on  each  file  is  essential  for  in  forming  people  about  this  project  and  helping  them  find 
additional  materials  through  Google  Book  Search.  Please  do  not  remove  it. 

+  Keep  it  legal  Whatever  your  use,  remember  that  you  are  responsible  for  ensuring  that  what  you  are  doing  is  legal.  Do  not  assume  that  just 
because  we  believe  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  the  United  States,  that  the  work  is  also  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  other 
countries.  Whether  a  book  is  still  in  copyright  varies  from  country  to  country,  and  we  can't  offer  guidance  on  whether  any  specific  use  of 
any  specific  book  is  allowed.  Please  do  not  assume  that  a  book's  appearance  in  Google  Book  Search  means  it  can  be  used  in  any  manner 
anywhere  in  the  world.  Copyright  infringement  liabili^  can  be  quite  severe. 

About  Google  Book  Search 

Google's  mission  is  to  organize  the  world's  information  and  to  make  it  universally  accessible  and  useful.   Google  Book  Search  helps  readers 
discover  the  world's  books  while  helping  authors  and  publishers  reach  new  audiences.  You  can  search  through  the  full  text  of  this  book  on  the  web 

at|http: //books  .google  .com/I 

^73^,  ,yp;^ 


9    P 






riRBT  PA8T0B  OF 


WITH  ▲ 


VOL.   III. 






!  VOLUME  m. 

I        » 





1-4L        God  is  the  inperior  Duposer  of  man's  time, 25, 26 

I  7-^       Mad,  who  is  made  next  to  God,  and  to  retnrn  to  his  rest  at 

the  end  of  the  larger  circle  of  his  life,  is  to  retoro  to 
'  him  at  the  end  of  the  lesser  circle  of  eTCiy  week,    .    .    26, 27 

10-13.    What  a  moral  law  is  not, 28,29 

14,  IS.    How  a  divine  law  maj  be  said  to  be  moral, ......         29 

»  16.         What  a  moral  law  is,  strictly  token, 29 

17-2a    A  moral  law,  considered  in  a  strict  sense,  is  not  good  merely 
because  commanded,  but  is  therefore  commanded  be- 

caose  it  is  good, 30-^2 

^               21-23.    What  is  that  goodness  in  a  moral  law  for  which  it  is  com- 
manded,        33-35 

24, 25.    Bj  what  mles  maj  that  goodness  be  known,  which  are  fonr,    36, 37 
Dirers  consectaries  flowing  from  the  description  of  a  moral 

law.     .  ^ 37-41 

That  dirine  determination  of  something  in  a  law  doth  not 

always  take  awaj  the  morality  of  it, 42-44 

^  29-^.    That  those  are  not  moral  laws  only,  which  are  known  to 

all  men  by  the  light  of  cormpt  nature, 44-51 

That  the  whole  docalc^e,  in  all  the  parts  of  it,  is  the 
\  moral  law  of  God:   Tilssef  30,  where  objections  are 

answered  to, 51 

J9-42.    Three  sorts  of  laws  which  were  among  the  Jews,  moral, 

ceremonial,  judicial, 51-58 

43.         The  true  state  of  the  question  whether  the  Sabbath  be  a 

moral  or  ceremonial  law, 54 

44, 45.    The  agreement  on  all  hands  how  far  the  law  of  the  Sab- 
bath if  moral 55,56 








1  "' 

Something  general  la  sgraed  on,  and  wholhnr  it  lies  uodor 

this  gcneril,  vii.,  a  seventh  day, 


The  rliief  means  of  resolving  this  concrotarsj  in  opening 

m  "' 

tlie  menning  of  the  fourth  commandment,      .... 



The  things  which  are  tnonl  in  (he  fourth  commandment 
are  either  primarily  or  secondarily  moral.      Those 
things  which  are  primarily   and  genernlly  moral   in 

me  lonrco  commannnient  arc   tcireu  i    i.  d  nine  ot 



Not  the  worship  itself,  hut  only  tho  solemn  time  of  it  is  re- 

qnircd  in  the  fonrlh  commandment, 

61,  ea 


How  holy  dniies  »re  for  lime,       -.    .    .    . 



Instituted  worship  is  not  directly  reqnircd  in  the  foarth,  but 
the   second    eomroandment    is    occasionally   cleared 

against  Wttllceus, 



If  tlic  moral  woi-sliip  itself  be  not  reqaircd  herein,  mnch 

less  is  tho  whole  eeremanial  worship 



Keither  the  pahlic  worship  only,  nor  Jewish  holy  dajs,  re- 



Kot  a  part  of  a  dny,  but  a.  whole  dny,  is  moral,  by  tho 



God's  wisdom  did  rather  choose  a  whole  day  together  for 
special  worship  than  borrow  a  part  of  every  day,    ,    . 



Tho  sin  of  Familists  and  others  who  allow  God  no  specini 

day,  hnt  mnko  all  days  eqaal, 



How  any  day  is  said  to  bo  holy,  and  that  though  nil  places 

are  alike  holy,  yet  all  days  are  not  therefore  alike  holy, 



Answer  to  such  scriplorea  as  seem  to  make  all  days  alilto 


holy  under  llie  New  Testament 


The  chief  reason  why  some  abolish  tho  day  of  (he  Sabbath 

whole  decalogne  itself  as  any  rule  of  life  nnto  his  people. 



An  inward  Sabbath  may  woU  consist  with  a  Sabbath  day, 



The  great  controversj  whether  the  law  be  a  mlo  of  life  (o 

a  believer,  discussed  in  sundry  theses 


91, 9S 

The  Spirit  is  not  tho  rale  of  life, 

is  tho  rule  of  life, 


*      OS. 


5     94. 

The  rule  of  the  law  is  kepi  in  Christ  as  matter  of  our  jus- 

tilrcnlion,  ool  sanetiScation, 




ii^A.     J 



I     ^ 



formed  bj  ChriBt  for  believen  under  that  notion  of 

thankfulness,  bat  by  way  of  meriti 94 

98, 99.  Whether  a  believer  is  to  act  in  yirtae  of  a  command,  .  94-96 
100  The  sin  of  those  who  affirm  that  Christian  obedience  is 

not  to  be  pat  forth  by  virtae  of  a  command,    ...  97 

101.  To  act  by  virtue  of  a  commandment,  and  by  virtue  of 

God's  Spirit,  are  subordinate  one  to  another,    ...  99 

102-104.  Whether  the  law  is  our  rule  as  gi%'cn  by  Moses  on  Mount 

Sinai,  or  only  as  it  is  given  by  Christ  on  Mount  Sion,  99-101 
105, 106.  How  works  and  law  duties  are  sometimes  commended 

and  sometimes  condemned, 102 

107.         The  new  creature,  how  it  is  under  the  law, 102 

108, 109.  How  the  children  of  God  under  the  Old  Testament  were 

under  the  law  as  a  schoolmaster,  and  not  those  of 

the  New,       .    .  • 103-108 

110.  How  the  gospel  requires  doing,  and  how  not,  and  about 

conditional  promises  in  the  gospel, 109 

111.  Various  motives  to  obedience  from  the  law  and  gospel, 

from  God  as  a  Creator,  and  from  Christ  as  a  Re- 
deemer,  do  not  vary  the  rule, 1 10 

112.  Unbelief  is  not  the  only  sin, Ill 

113.  Three  evils  arising  from  their  doctrine  who  deny  the  di- 

recti\-e  use  of  the  moral  law, 112 

114.  The  sin  of  such  as  deny  the  humbling  work  of  the  law 

under  gospel  ministrations, 112 

115, 116.  Their  error  who  will  not  have  a  Christian  pray  for  par- 
don of  sin,  OT^tum  for  sin,      118,119 

117.  Whether  sanctification  be  a  doubtful  e%'idence,  and  may 

not  be  a  just  evidence,  and  whether  the  gospel  and 
all  the  promises  of  it  belong  to  a  sinner  as  a  sinner, 
and  whether  sight  of  corruption  be  (by  the  gospel) 
the  settled  evidence  of  salvation,  as  some  plead  for,  119 

118.  Whctlicr  the  first  evidence  be  without  the  being,  or  only 

the  seeing  of  grace, 128 

119.  The  true  grounds  of  evidencing  God's  love  in  Christ  cleared,  131 
120-122.  Not  only  a  day,  nor  only  a  Sabbath  day,  but  a  seventh 

day  determinedf'is  the  last  thing  generally  moral  in 

the  fourth  commandment, 133-135 

123, 124.  That  which  is  particularly  moral  herein  is  this  or  that 

particular  seventh  day,       138 

125.  The  morality  of  a  Sabbath  may  be  as  strongly  and  easily 
urged  from  the  comniandmcnt  of  observing  that 
particular  seventh  day  from  the  creation,  as  the 
morality  of  a  day, 139 



9.  It  tB  not  in  man'a  liberty  to  take  «ny  one  of  tho  a 

days  in  a  week  to  be  the  Christian  SBbbalb,     .     .     .  139-141 

I.  A  determined  time  is  here  required,  but  not  what  natnre, 
but  nhnt  coanael,  shall  determine,  and  conseqaenlly 
this  or  Ihnt  geveolh  day, 143, 143 

3.  Tho  forco  of  God's  example  in  resting  tho  eeventh,  and 

working  Etx  da<ra,  how  far  it  extends 113,144 

6.  No  reason  that  God  must  hare  a  scccntli  year,  because 

he  will  have  a  seventh  day, 146 

How  a  cirenmstanco  of  titne  is  capable  of  moralily,    .     .  148 

The   law  of  the  Sabbatb  is  a  bomogeneal  pan  of  the 
moral  lew,  and  is  iheicfbre  moral ;  and  whether  it 

be  moral  in  respect  of  the  tetter, 146 

Whclhor  the  decalogne  is  said  to  be  the  moral  law  in  re- 
spect of  tho  greater  part  only,' 147 

0,  The  law  of  the  Sabbath  hath  equal  glory  with  all  the 

other  nine  morals,  and  bath  therefore  eqnal  raoralitj,  148-154 

1.  The  Sabbath  was  giyea  as  a  moral  law  to  man  in  in- 

nocency,        15S-158 

3.  The  Sabbath  said  to  be  sanctified,  (Gen,  ii.,)  not  merely 

io  a  way  of  dcsliDBlioa  or  anlicipatioo, 158-16S 

6.  Adam  in  innoceney  might  need  a  Sabbatb, 166-168 

No  types  of  Christ  given  to  man  in  innocency,  ....  16S 

8.  The  Sabbath  was  no  type  In  respect  of  its  original  ia- 

elilation, 169-174 

3.  Tho  heathens,  by  the  light  of  corrupt  nature,  bad  some 

kind  of  knowledge  of  the  Sabbath 174-176 

7,  The  law  of  naiuro  diversely  taken,  and  what  it  is,  .    .    .  I7G-1T9 
So  argument  to  proro  the  Sabbath  ceremonial,  because 

Christ  appointed  no  special  dajforihe  Lord's  supper,  179 

No  argument  to  prove  the  Sabbath  ceremonial,  because 

it  is  reckoned  among  tbe  cerenonials 179 

Christ  is  not  said  to  be  the  Lord  of  the  Sabbath,  because 

it  was  ceremonial, 180 

Thongh  the  Sabbath  be  made  for  man,  yet  it  is  not  thore- 

fore  ceremonial, 131 

A  fond  distinction  of  the  Sabbalb  i"n  miuu  myalimetlileraii,  IS9 

Although  wo  arc  bound  to  rest  every  day  from  sin,  jet 

WB  are  not  therefore  to  make  every  day  a  Sabbath,  1S3 

5.  The  Sabbatb  was  not  proper  to  the  Jews,  because  they 

only  were  able  (na  some  sty)  to  observe  tbe  exact 

7.  An  onswer  to  M.  Carpenter's  anil  Ilcylin's  new-invented 

■rgument  against  the  moralil;  of  the  Sabbalb,    .    .  184 


It  light  in  Scri|itit. 
Apottoliol  uinritlen  tnui 
Keilher  cbottli'i  cuMom, 

ror  change  of  the  Snbbatli, 
am  nagmiiud  for  clionge  of  il, 
r  any  imp«rkl  taw,  ground  of 



EoT  Ihe  obMrvklion  of  (he  ChriUiui  Sabbath  ariaeth  from 

the  Taarth  commaDdmenC 

How  the  tint  daj  ia  tbv  week  m»j  1h  called  the  •«ienlh4By, 

1.  The  wtl!  of  God  the  efficient  euur,  the  resninctiDii  of 

Christ  the  moral  eatiae,  of  thu  cliange  of  the  Sabbath, 

i.  The  uiettuiou  no  groBud  of  the  change  of  the  Sabbath,    . 

r.  The  ml  of  God  being  spoiled  in  his  &nt  creation  1^  the 

(jn  of  nun,  kenm  the  day  of  rvit  nuf  be  well  changed, 

I.  Neilfaer  the  three  days'  resting  of  Cbrist  in  the  grave,  nor 

tbe  ihirqr-three  yean  of  Chriat'e  labor,  Iho.groand  of 

oar  labor  and  rent  now, 

Kol  only  Chriil's  iwnnvctioo,  bat  an  affixed  type  10  the 
im  Sabbath,  U  the  groand  ot  the  abrogation  of  it,    - 

I.  What  the  afflxcd  type  to  the  Sabbath  is, 

Tba  mere  exerciMa  of  holy  duties  upon  a  day  are  doi  any 

tne  grotmi]  to  make  sadi  a  day  tbe  Cbriitiui  Sabbath, 

Bow  holy  duties  on  a  day  may  eviacc  a  S^bath  day,    .     . 

I.  Thafinl  dajof  Ihc  week  honored  by  the  primitive  chnrcbet 

boD  the  commaadniODl  of  the  Lord  Jcsns.       .... 

I.  The  apoalle'a  preaching  on  ihe  Jewish  Sabbath  doih  not 
aigue  it  lo  be  ihc  Christian  Sabbath,  ....... 

The  Stsl  da)  of  the  week  proved  to  be  Ihe  Christian  Sab- 

balh  by  divine  institution 

Tbe  Gnt  pUee  ilirgeA  for  Ibe  Chriition  Sabbath   (Acli: 

XI.  7)  cleared  by  oiae  consideraiioni, 

Tbe  second  place   (from   1    Cor.   x*L  I,  2(  clcarod    from 

>  general 

19S,  103 



97-99.  Tbe  third  leripiorc    (Her.  i.  10)   deared  hy  t' 


i^^   40.        How  iha  Christian  Sabbath  a 

^^^L  nandoient.  althoo^h  it  be  n 

^^^L4I.        Hie  «fTtir  of  thuar,  vspcdnlly  ir 

^^H  ohaerred  two  Sabbaths, 

^^H  itS,H.  How  ihe  work  of  reileniplion  m 

^^B  10  obKrve  ilic  Snblulb, 

^^H   M.        Hon  fat  the  jud^meni  ol  God  upon  profaners  of  the  Lord's 

^^m  6af  i*  of  force  to  ovinoe  Ibo  halineaa  of  the  Sabbath, .. 

selh  from  the  fourth  com- 
31  particularly  named  in  it, 
Ihe  easicm  churches,  who 

■y  be  s  ground  far  all  men 





X  CONTENTS.  ^^^^H 

DiSbreDce  of  tbe  laints*  bondage  ander  sin  nnd  Sntui  from  oAen,  207-999 

Wherein  the  imrnrd  govcmmenl  of  Christ  c^onaiils, 300 

Wbea  the  govemment  of  Christ  is  cast  off,  Christ  him^lf  to  be 

received, Ml 

When  the  goal  receives  Christ  hiiDBcIf, 302 

Whole  aoni  mnst  close  with  the  whtrfe  will  of  Christ, 303-304 

Will  of  Christ  directing  or  correcting, SOt 

Will  of  Christ  cast  otT  in  jadgmeat  or  practice, 305 

Corao  to  Christ  for  strength  to  do  his  will 306 

Xho  benefits  of  itceiving  Christ  for  strength 307 

How  men  refuse  to  do  this 303 

For  what  ends  wc  mnst  aabmit  to  Christ, 30» 

The  ehutrih  Christ's  kingdom, '.         310 

Threefold  power  of  Christ  in  (be  church 310 

Sapieme  power  of  Christ  in  his  cbnrcb, 311 

Breach  of  corcnant  a  provokiog  sin, 312 

Breach  of  covenant  procures  the  desolatioo  of  churche*,      •    •    ■         SIS 

Setring  up  hnman  inventinns  casting  off  Christ, 314 

Sin  of  dialing  off  ordinances  for  temporal  advantages,  .  .  .  .  315-31 B 
Secret  pollntion  of  onlinanccs  whnt "drives  the  Lord  nwaj,  .  ,  .  31S,31» 
Tocomc  toordinanctis,  and  not  lo  Oirisi  in  them,  it  to  cASt  ofTChrfst,  3M 
We  must  bo  content  with  nothing  short  of  the  power  of  the  lift 

of  Christ, 328 

Tbe  chnrch  the  liighesl  tribanat  of  Christ  on  earth, 323 

What  |K>nrer  given  the  church, 399,  324 

Neglect  of  living  in  chnrch  Boetel^, 3S4 

Power  of  binding  nnd  loosing, 325 

DdIj  of  cbnich  members  lo  edify  one  another, 326 

Means  of  ediRcation, 397-330 

Hindcran CCS  of  matnal  edification,        330,331 

Fewer  of  chardi  officers 931-339 

The  sin  of  those  who  usurp  it, 939 

Tbe  evil  of  not  submitting  to  them, 330 

MiiCMTiage  of  chnrch  mcmben, 338 

Common  wealtha,  when  ordered  according  to  Chrbt's  will,  an  his 

kingdom, 339 

No  one  forni  of  civil  government  jure  diii'no 340 

We  most  be  subject  (o  the  civil  magistrate,  and  wbj, 341 

When  this  eubjectioa  it  cisl  off, 342 

Wbelher  he  ma;  pnnish  sins  after  the  first  table, 342, 343 

Kmr  and  heresy  die  bj  opposition,  truth  thrives  the  more.  .  .  .  343 
Error  and  heresj  may  not  moke  what  laws  thej  please,  ....  343 
Two  tbiugl  occasion  the  breach  of  ail  laws, 343 


Seldom  *  penecator,  bat  he  is  an  adulterer, 844 

The  eril  of  loose  companj, 844 

Soldiers  not  to  neglect  the  command  of  their  leaders, 844, 845 

Townsmen  shoald  obey  town  orders, 345 

God's  laws  only  absolately  bind  conscience, 345, 346 

All  good  laws  either  expressly  mentioned  in  the  word,  or  dedaced 

from  it, 346 

Whj  all  laws  shoald  be  according  to  the  word 347 

Homan  laws,  agreeable  to  the  word,  bind  conscience,  and  why,    .  847 
What  a  Christian  shoald  do  in  case  thej  be  not  according  to  the 

word, 347 

Things  indifferent  not  to  be  restrained  by  law, 348 

Laws  for  pablic  good  to  be  submitted  to, 349 

Of  breach  of  laws  merely  penal, 349 

The  sin  of  serrants  not  subject  to  their  masters, 350 

In  places  of  liberty,  most  danger  of  licentiousness, 351 

Ciod  hath  many  wars  to  bring  into  bondage  when  his  goyemment 

is  cast  off, 351, 352 

Reason  to  be  thankful  for  our  liberties, 352 

Means  of  thankfulness, 352,  353 

Ways  in  which  liberty  may  be  abused, 353, 354 

Look  not  for  an  earthly  paradise  of  Christ, 355 

Spiritual  refreshments  abundant  recompense  for  temporal  dis- 
tresses,      355 

Hotires  to  come  under  Christ's  government, 355 

Difference  between  God's  senrice  and  the  ^nrioe  of  others,  .    .    .  356 

Wherein  to  submit  to  Christ, 356 

ETeiy  one  to  whom  the  gospel  comes  bound  to  beliere,    ....  358 

Objections  against  believing  answered, 358 

Love  to  Christ  an  evidence  that  we  are  his, 858 

How  great  a  sin  to  neglect  this, 359 

to  submit  to  Christ, 859 


Christ  the  true  Messiah, 863 

What  was  the  Father's  testimony, 863 

/.  Two  degrees  of  knowing  God, 364 

A  man  may  hear  the  word,  and  not  hear  God  speaking  In  it,    .    .  864-866 

JBl  '  CONTENTS.  ■ 

mj  the  Mints  find  sncb  alterationB  In  tihaniselvcs  whon  ihtj  heu 
the  word 8 

How  ire  we  to  know  whether  we  have  heiird  the  Lord's  Toice  in 
the  word 3 

God'»  Toicfi  carrius  liome  Christ, 

The  eflicBey  of  the  word  may  lie  hid, 

The  efficacy  of  tlio  word  maj  be  lost  afler  it  huth  been  felt,  ...  8 

Rot  needful  alwuya  to  feel  it  alike, 8 

Not  preserved  in  a  spirit  of  iirayer, 

Nat  thankfoloeBa  for  the  good  found, 

A  double  virloe  in  the  word  to  beget  and  nourish. 

EIScBcy  of  the  word  sppenrs  in  a  power  of  conflict  againit  comption, 

Feeling  the  clBcacy  of  the  word  an  pvidcneo  of  election,  .... 

Victory  against  sin  either  complete  or  incomplete, 

rs  how  to  pfcaci 

B«»t  not  in  onf 

How  to  hear  the  word  effcctnally 

Come  to  hoHT,  moDming  nnder  a  aenae  of  iafirmiiies, 

How  to  hear  God  speaking  in  the  word, 

Tnut  not  to  the  outward  word,  but  to  the  grace  of  Ood  wHh  it,    . 

Place  onr  happiness  in  closing  with  the  word, 3 

Brery  tittle  of  the  word  cost  the  Wood  of  Chriat, 

IT  not  under  the  power  of  the  word,  we  are  under  the  power  of  Inat, 
Tbe  comfort  of  the  word  remains  till  deatb,  yea,  nnto  eternal  life, 


(Psitnci,  By  DSTliI  Iliiio«ii,) 












Neh.  ziii.  17«  18.  —  '*  What  eril  thinff  is  thin  that  ye  do,  and  profane 
the  Sahbath  day  ?  Did  not  your  fathers  thus,  and  did  not  our  God 
brinK  all  this  evil  upon  us,  and  upon  this  city  ?  yet  yo  bring  more 
wrath  upon  Israel  by  profaning  the  Sabbath.'* 

Jbr.  zrii.  24,  25.  —  "  If  ye  hallow  the  Sabbath,  to  do  no  work  therein, 
then  shall  there  enter  into  the  gates  of  this  city  kings  and  princes.'* 



TexT  a  seventh  part  of  time  hatb  been  religiously  and  univer- 
sally observed  both  under  the  law  and  under  Ibe  gospel,  is  without 
■U  controversy;  the  great  doubt  and  difficulty  which  now  re- 
mains cmtceming  this  time  is  the  morality  of  it,  whether  it  was 
tinu  observed  in  the  Christian  churches  by  unwritten  tradition, 
or  by  divine  commisaion ;  whether  from  the  churches'  custom,  or 
Christ's  command ;  whether  as  a  moral  duty,  or  as  a  human 
law :  for  although  some  would  make  the  observation  of  such  a 
portion  of  time  ibe  sour  fruit  of  the  Ebionitcs'  superslitioua  doc- 
trines, yet  all  the  ancient  and  best  writers  in  the  purest  timea  do 
gi»B  micb  honor  to  it,  that  whoever  doubts  of  it  must  either  be 
utterly  ignorant,  or  willfully  blinded  in  the  knowledge  of  the  his- 
tories and  doctrines  of  those  times,  and  must  desire  a  candle  to 
■bow  them  the  aun  and  noonday.  Clemens  only  seems  to  cast 
(om«  stains  on  it  by  making  all  days  equal,  and  every  day  a  Sab- 
bath ;  but  upon  narrow  search,  his  meaning  may  appear,  not  to 
deny  the  observation  of  the  day,  but  only  to  blame  the  froth  and 
TBoity  of  sundry  Christians,  who,  if  they  externally  observed  the 
day,  they  cared  not  how  they  lived  every  day  after :  nor  is  it  to 
be  wondered  at  if  Origen  turn  this  day  sometime  into  an  allegory 
and  a  continual  spiritual  rest  day,  who  miserably  transforms 
(many  times)  the  plainest  Scriptures  into  such  shapes,  and  Inms 
their  subslanca  into  such  shadows,  and  beating  out  the  best  of  (be 
kataeKfoeds  hit  guests  with  such  chaff  and  busks  ;  and  although 
wtaaf  OttMr  festivals  were  observed  by  those  times,  which  may 



make  the  SabbntU  suspected  lo  be  bora  out  of  the  same  womb 
of  human  custom  with  the  rest,  yet  we  shall  find  the  seventh 
day's  real  to  have  another  crown  of  glory  set  upon  the  head  of  it 
by  the  holy  men  of  G!od  in  those  times  than  upon  those  which 
superstition  so  soon  hatched  and  brought  iurth  ;  so  that  they  that 
rvud  the  histories  of  thofie  times,  in  observing  two  Sabbaths  in 
some  places,  Easter,  Whitsunday,  yea,  divers  ethnic  and  heathen- 
ish daya,  will  need  no  other  comment  on  those  testa  of  Paul, 
wherein  he  condemns  the  observation  of  days ;  which,  beginning 
to  fly  abroad  in  the  daylight  of  the  apostles,  might  well  outface 
the  succeeding  ages,  and  multiply  with  more  authority  in  darker 
times ;  yet  so  as  that  the  seventh  day's  rest  (call  it  what  you 
will)  still  kept  its  place  and  ancient  glory,  as  in  the  sequel  ahall 

When,  therefore,  the  good  will  of  Him  who  dwelt  in  the  burn- 
ing bush  of  the  aiSictcd  primitive  churches  gave  princes  and 
emperors  to  be  their  nursing  fathers,  pious  Constantiue,  among 
other  Christian  edicts,  enjoins  the  observation  of  the  Lord's  day ; 
wherein  (if  he  was  bound  by  his  place  to  be  a  nourishing 
father)  he  went  not  beyond  hia  commission,  in  swaddling  and 
cherishing  this  truth  and  apgtointnient  of  Christ,  and  not  suffer- 
ing  it  to  die  and  perish  through  the  wickedness  of  men ;  the 
power  of  princes  extending  to  see  Christ's  laws  observed,  though 
not  to  impose  any  humau  inventions  and  church  constitutions  of 
their  own.  It  is  true,  indeed,  that  this  princely  edict  was  mixed 
with  some  imperfection  and  corruption,  it  falling  loo  short  in 
some  things,  and  extending  loo  far  in  others ;  but  there  is  no  juat 
cause  for  any  to  stumble  much  at  this,  that  knows  the  sick  bead 
and  heart  by  the  weak  and  feeble  pulse  and  cross  temper  of  those 
clouded  though  otherwise  triumphing  times. 

The  successors  of  this  man  child  (bom  out  of  the  long  and 
weary  throes  of  the  poor  travailing  church)  wei'e  enlarged  gener- 
ally in  their  uare  and  conscience  to  preserve  the  religious  honor 
due  to  this  day,  until  the  time  of  Charles  the  Great,  who.  in  the 
latter  end  of  Lis  reign,  observing  how  greatly  the  Sabbath  was 
profaned,  (especially  by  the  continuance  and  lewdness  of  church- 



I'UKFACi;.  It 

men.)  did  tfaerefore  caII  five  nalioiial  councils,  (which  I  need  not 
here  mention,)  in  all  which  the  Subbath  b  advanced  to  as  strict 
observation  to  the  full  a^  hath  been  of  Ute  ycai's  coodemned  hy 
wme  in  the  Sabbalariiu]  reformers,  that  it  is  s.  wonder  how  any 
man  should  cast  off  all  shame,  and  so  far  forget  himselt'  as  to 
make  the  Sabbutb  a  device  of  Fulco,  or  Peter  Bruis,  EustacLJus, 
or  the  Book  at  Golgotha,  and  put  the  visor  of  novelly  upon  the 
ag«d  fac«  of  it,  as  if  it  were  scarce  known  to  anj*  of  the  martyrs 
in  Qaeen  Marj's  time,  but  receiving  Gtrengih  and  growth  from 
Ua«ter  Perkins,  was  first  hatched  and  received  life  from  under 
the  wings  of  a  few  \ate  disciplinarian  zealots. 

jVnd  it  con  not  be  denied  bat  that  the  Sabbath  (like  many  other 
precious  appointments  and  truths  of  God)  did  shake  ofi'her  dust, 
ind  put  on  her  comely  and  beautiful  garments,  and  hath  been 
rntieh  honored  and  magnified,  since  the  times  of  Ilie  reformation; 
the  doctrine  and  darknes:^  of  Popery  (like  that  of  the  Phari- 
««e«)  Dot  only  obscuring  the  doctrine  of  faith,  but  also  of  the  law 
and  obedience  of  faith,  and  so  hath  obscured  this  of  the  Sabbalh  ; 
only  herein  they  did  excel  their  forefathers  the  scribes  end 
nnriwes,  for  these  added  their  own  superstitious  resting  from 
ikings  nnnlful  and  lawful  to  their  merely  externa]  observation 
of  the  day  ;  but  they  (unto  their  external  observation  of  the 
ttame  of  the  day)  ailded  their  abominable  profunntiona  to  it,  in 
Jby  games,  and  May  poles,  in  sports  an<l  pastimes,  in  dancing 
tai  revclings,  and  so  laid  it  level,  and  made  it  equal,  (in  a  man- 
a*r,)  to  the  rest  of  tlieir  holy  days  ;  that  as  th£y  came  to  shuRle 
out  the  second  commandment  almost  out  of  the  decalt^ue,  so 
■D  lime  they  came  to  be  blinded  with  that  horror  of  darkness,  aa 
to  translale  the  words  of  the  commandment  into  some  of  their 
Mtechiatn*,  remember  to  ktep  the  holy  J'etticaU  ;  and  therefore 
IhoM!  woriliies  of  the  reformation  who  have  contended  for  all  that 
'.fcotior  which  is  duo  to  this  day  are  unjustly  aspersed  for  ptead- 
fag  for  a  Jewish  and  superstitious  strictness,  when  the  cause  they 
'  fctn'lh  is  no  other,  in  truth,  than  to  vindicate  the  Sabbath,  both  in 
'"%»  doctrine  and  observation  of  it,  from  Papists'  profaneness ; 
tfaerefore  all  the  world  may  see,  that  under  pretense  of  op* 


posiug  in  others  a  kiDd  of  Judaazing  upon  this  day,  ihe  adver^ir 
ries  of  it  do  nothing  else  but  maintain  a.  gross  point  of  practical 
Popery,  who  are  by  law  most  ignorant  und  gross  profanera  of 
this  day ;  and  therefore  when  many  of  Christ's  serranta  are 
branded  and  condemned  for  placing  bo  much  of  religion  in  the 
observation  of  this  day,  and  yet  Bishop  White  and  some  others 
of  them  shall  acknowledge  as  much  as  they  plead  for,  if  other 
festivals  be  taken  in  with  it  ordained  by  the  church,  (as  that  they 
are  the  nursery  of  religion  and  all  virtue,  a  means  of  planting 
faith  and  saving  knowledge,  of  heavenly  and  temporal  blessings, 
and  the  profanation  of  them  hateful  to  God  and  aU  good  men 
that  fear  God,  and  to  be  punislied  in  those  which  shall  offend,) 
they  do  hereby  plainly  hold  forth  what  market  they  drive  to, 
and  what  spirit  acts  them  in  setting  up  man's  posts  by  God's 
Pinal's,  and  in  giving  equal  honor  to  other  festivals  and  holy  days, 
which  those  whom  they  oppose  do  maintain  as  due  to  the  Sab- 
bath alone,  upon  better  grounds. 

The  daystar  from  on  high  visiting  Ihe  first  reformers  in  Ger- 
many, enabled  them  la  gee  many  things,  and  so  to  scatter  much, 
yea,  most,  of  the  Popish  and  horrible  darkness  which  generally 
ovei'spread  the  face  of  all  Europe  at  llial  day  ;  but  divers  of  them 
did  not  (as  well  they  might  not)  see  all  things  with  Ihe  like 
clearness,  whereof  this  of  the  Sabbath  hath  seemed  to  bo  one : 
their  chief  difficulty  lay  here;  they  saw  a  moral  command  for  a 
seventh  day.  and  yet  withal  a  change  of  that  Hrst  seventh  day, 
and  hence  thought  that  something  iu  it  was  moral  in  respect  of 
the  command,  and  yet  something  ceremonial,  because  of  the 
change ;  and  therefore  they  issued  their  thoughts  here,  that  it 
was  partly  moral  and  partly  ceremonial,  and  hence  their  observa- 
tion of  the  day  hath  been  (answerable  to  their  judgments)  more 
lax  and  loose  ;  whose  arguments  to  prove  the  day  partly  ceiemo- 
niol  have  (upon  narrow  examination)  made  it  wholly  ceremo- 
nial ;  it  being  the  usual  unhappiness  of  such  arguments  as  arc 
produced  in  defense  of  a  lesser  error  to  grow  big  with  some 
man  child  in  them,  which  in  lime  grows  up,  and  so  serve  only 
to  maintain  a  far  greater;  and  hence  by  that  part  of  tite 


PBEFACt.  13 

controversy  ihey  have  laid  foundaliona  of  much  looseness  upon 
tbat  day  ajuong  themselves,  and  have  unawares  laid  ihe  corner 
■ones  of  some  gross  points  of  Familism,  And  strengtheaed  hereby 
tte  haada  of  AriDioians,  malignants,  and  prelates,  aa  lo  profane 
tte  Sabbath,  so  to  make  hkc  of  ihcir  principles  for  tiie  introduc- 
tion  of  all  human  inventions  under  the  name  and  shadow  of  the 
church,  which  if  it  hath  power  lo  authorize  and  estabhsh  such 
a  (lay  of  worship,  let  any  man  living  then  name  what  invention 
b«  can,  bni  that  it  may  much  more  easily  be  ushered  in  upon  the 
■ame  ground  ;  and  therefore,  though  posterity  hath  cause  forever 
to  admire  God's  goodness  for  that  abundance  of  light  and  life 
poared  out  by  those  vessels  of  glory  in  the  first  beginnings  of 
leformatim,  yet  in  this  narrow  of  the  Sabbath  it  is  no  wonder  if 
they  stepped  a  little  beside  the  lAith  ;  and  it  is  to  be  charitably 
hoped  and  believed,  thai,  had  they  then  foreseen  what  ill  use 
Mme  ia  af\er  ages  would  make  of  their  principles,  they  would 
kavB  been  do  otherwise  minded  than  some  of  their  followers  and 
fifenda,  «si>ecially  in  the  churches  of  Scotland  and  England,  who 
■ight  well  «ee  a  little  farther  (as  they  use  lo  s])cak)  when  they 
Mood  upon  such  tall  men's  shoulders.  __ 

II  la  easy  lo  demonstrate  by  Scripture  and  argument,  as  well 
m  by  experience,  tbat  religion  is  just  as  the  Sabbath  is,  and 
decays  and  grows  as  the  Sabbath  is  esteemed :  the  immediate 
bodor  and  worsliip  of  God,  which  is  brought  forth  and  swaddled 
ID  the  Ihr«e  IJrsI  commandments,  is  nursed  up  and  ruckled  in  the 
boKun  of  tlie  Snbbutli.  If  Popery  will  have  gross  ignorance  and 
btind  devotion  continued  among  its  miserable  captives,  let  it  then 
bo  made  (like  the  other  festivals)  a  merry  and  a  sporting  8ab- 
hult ;  if  any  state  would  reduce  the  people  under  it  lo  the 
Hant'uh  fajtb  and  blind  obedience  again,  let  them  erect  (for  law- 
fal  pastimes  and  sports)  a  dancing  Sabbath  ;  if  the  God  of  this 
worU  wotild  have  all  professors  enjoy  a  total  immunity  from  the 
Uw  of  God,  and  all  manner  of  licentiousness  allowed  them  with- 
oot  ebeck  of  oonscience,  let  him  ihen  make  an  every-day  Sabbath. 
If  tfapre  hatli  been  more  of  the  power  of  godliness  appearing  in 
that  tmall  iudosure  of  the  British  imlion  than  in  those  vast 
TO  I.,  in.  it 







contineaU  elsewhere,  where  reformation  and  more  exact  church 
discipline  have  taken  place,  it  cannot  well  he  imputed  lo  an}-  out- 
ward means  more  ibau  their  excelling  care  and  conscience  of 
honoring  (he  Sabbath;  and  although  Master  Rogers,  in  his  Fref* 
ace  Id  the  39  Articles,  injuriously  and  wretchedly  makes  tlie 
strict  observation  of  the  Sabbath  the  last  refuge  of  lies,  by  which 
Blralagem  the  godly  ministers  in  former  times,  being  driven  out 
of  all  their  other  strongholds,  did  hope  in  time  lo  drive  out  tlie 
prelacy,  and  bring  in  again  their  discipline,  yet  thus  much 
may  be  gathered  from  the  month  of  such  an  accuser,  that  the 
worship  and  government  of  the  kingdom'  and  church  of  Christ 
Jesus  is  accordingly  set  forward  as  the  Sabbath  ia  honored. 
Prelacy,  Popery,  profaiieness  must  down,  and  shall  down  ia 
time,  if  the  Sabbath  be  exaetly  kept. 

But  why  the  Lord  Christ  should  Iteep  bis  servanla  in  Eng- 
land and  Scotland  to  clear  up  and  vindicate  this  point  of 
the  Sabbath,  and  welcome  it  with  more  love  than  some  pre- 
dous  ones  in  foreign  churches,  no  man  can  imagine  any  other 
cause  than  God's  own  free  grace  and  tender  love,  whose  wind 
"  blows  where  and  when  it  will ;  Deus  noltit  h<ec  otia  fecit,  and 
the  tiroes  are  coming  wherein  God's  work  will  better  declare  the 
reason  of  this  and  some  other  discoveries  by  (he  British  nation, 
which  modesty  and  hnmilty  would  forbid  all  sober  minds  to  make 
mention  of  now. 

That  a  seventh  day's  rest  hath  (therefore)  been  of  universal 
observation,  is  without  controversy;  the  morality  of  it  (as  hath 
been  said)  is  now  the  controversy.  In  the  primitive  times,  when 
the  question  was  propounded,  Servtuii  Ihminicum  i  (Hast  ihou 
kept  the  Lord's  day?)  their  answer  was  generally  this :  Chri$- 
tiania  mm  ;  intermitUre  Tionpostum,  (i.  e.,  I  am  a  Christian;  lean 
not  neglect  it.)  The  observation  of  this  day  was  the  badge  of 
their  Christianity.  This  was  their  practice ;  but  what  their 
judgment  was  about  the  morality  of  it  is  not  safe  to  inquire  from 
the  tractates  of  some  of  our  late  writers  in  this  controversy ;  for 
it  is  no  wonder  if  they  that  thrust  the  Sabbath  out  of  para- 
dise, and  banish  it  out  of  the  world  until  Moses'  time,  and  then 



mak«  it  »  mere  ceremony  all  bis  time  till  Cbrisl's  ascension.  If 
■ince  thai  time  lliey  bring  it  a  peg  luirer,  and  moke  it  ta  be  a  / 
haman  moslilution  of  the  church,  rather  than  any  divine  insd- 
tation  of  Christ  Jesus,  —  and  herein  those  that  oppose  the  morality 
of  it  by  dint  of  argument,  and  out  of  candor  and  conscience, 
propose  their  grounds  on  which  they  remain  unsatiaficd,  —  I  do 
from  my.  he^art  both  highly  and  heartily  honor,  and  especially  the 
labors  of  Master  Primrose  and  Muster  Ironside,  many  of  whose 
arguments  and  answers  to  what  is  usually  said  in  defence  of  the 
morality  of  the  day,  whoever  ponders  them  shall  find  them 
heavy  1  the  foundations  and  sinews  of  whose  discourses  I  have 
therefore  had  a  special  eye  to  in  the  ensuing  theses,  with  a  most 
&ee  submission  of  what  is  here  returned  in  answer  thereto,  to 
the  censure  of  belter  minds  and  riper  thoughia ;  being  verily 
persuaded,  that  whoever  finds  no  knots  or  difficulties  to  humble 

spirit  herein,  either  knows  not  himself,  or  not  the  controversy. 

It  Bd  for  those  whose  chief  arguments  are  reproaches  and  re-  I 
viliiigs  of  imbittered  and  corrupt  hearts,  rather  than  solid  reasons  ' 
of  modest  minds,  I  wholly  decline  the  pursuit  of  such  creatures, 
irhoK  weapons  is  their  swell,  and  not  any  eiren'gth,  and  do  leave 
them  to  His  tribunal  who  judgeth  righteously,  for  blearing  the 
eje«  of  the  world,  and  endeavoring  to  exasperate  princes,  and 
make  wise  men  believe  that  this  doctrine  of  the  Sabbath  is  but  a 
kt«  novelty  ;  a  doctrine  tending  to  a  high  degree  of  schism;  a 
bnatio  Jwlaixing,  like  his  at  Tewksbury  ;  Sabbata  tanda  cola,  i.  e., 
ft  piece  of  disciplinary  policy  to  advance  Presbytery  ;  a 
■itioas  seething  over  of  the  hot  or  whining  simplicity  of  ai 
rigid,  crabbed,  precise,  crackbrained,   Pnritimical  party.     The\ 

iieoDB  God  hath  his  little  days  of  judgment  in  this  life  lo  clear 

and  vindicate  the  righteous  cause  of  his  innocent  servants 
[lapinit  all  gainsayers ;  and  who  sees  not  (but  those  that  will  be 
Wind)  that  the  Lord  hath  begun  lo  do  something  this  way  by 
late  broils  ?  The  controversy  God  hath  with  a  land  ia 
HIBity  times  in  defense  of  the  controversies  of  his  faithful  wit. 
tiMtM  i  the  sword  maintains  argument,  and  makes  way  lor  that 
whieh  the  word  could  not :  those  plants  which  (not  many  years 




since)  most  men  would  not  believe  not  lo  be  of  God's  planting, 
hath  the  Lord  pulled  up.  Tlie  three  innocent  firtbrands  so  fust 
tied  to  Bome  foies'  tails  are  now  prelly  well  quenched,  and  tlie 
tails  almost  cut  off.  This  cnuse  of  the  Sabbath,  also,  the  Lord 
JeauB  ia  now  handling ;  God  hath  cast  down  the  crowns  of 
princes,  stained  the  robes  of  nobles  with  dirt  and  blood,  broken 
the  crosiers,  nnd  torn  the  miters  in  pieces,  for  the  controversy  of 
his  Sabbath.  (Jer.  xvii.  27.)  He  hath  already  made  way  for  his 
discipline  also,  (which  they  feared  the  precise  Sabbath  would 
introduce  again,)  by  such  a  way  as  hath  made  all  hearts  lo  ache, 
just  according  to  the  words,  never  to  be  forgotten,  of  Mr.  Udal, 
in  his  Preface  to  the  "  Demonstration  of  Discipline."  The 
Council  of  Matiacon  imputed  tlie  irruption  of  the  Golha  into  the 
empire  to  the  profanation  of  the  Sabbath.  Germany  may  now 
.  sec  (or  else  one  day  they  shall  see)  that  one  great  cause  of 
their  troubles  is,  that  the  Sabbath  ivanled  its  rest  in  the  days  of 
I  their  quietness.  England  was  at  rest' till  they  troubled  God's 
I  Sabbath.  The  Lord  Jesus  must  reign ;  the  government  of  hia 
house,  the  laws  of  his  kingdom,  the  solemn  days  of  his  worahip 
must  be  established  ;  the  cause  of  his  sulfering  and  afflicted  ser- 
vants, (not  of  our  late  religious  scomers  at  ordinances,  laws,  and 
Sabbaths,)  who  are  now  at  rest  from  their  labors,  but  in  former 
times  wept,  and  prayed,  and  petitioned,  and  preached,  and  writ, 
and  suffered,  and  died  for  these  ibinga,  and  arc  now  crying  under 
the  aitar,  must  and  shall  certainly  he  cleared  before  men  and 
Tangels.  Heaven  and  earth  shall  pasa  away  before  one  tittle  of 
|_the  law  (much  less  a  whole  Sabbath)  shall  perish. 

But  while  I  am  thus  musing,  methinks  no  measure  of  tears 
are  sufficient  to  lament  the  present  state  of  times ;  that  when 
the  Lord  Jesus  was  come  forth  to  vindicate  the  cause  and  con- 
troversy of  Ziou,  there  should  rise  up  other  instruments  of  spir- 
'  itual  wickednesses  in  high  pkees,  to  blot  out  the  name  and  sweet 
remembrance  of  this  day  from  off  the  face  of  the  earth.  The 
enemies  of  the  Sabbath  are  now  not  so  much  malignant  lime- 

#  servers  and  aspiring  brambles,   whom    preferment  principalljr    ' 

*  bissed  lo  knock  at  ttie  Sabbath ;  but  those  who  have  eaten  b: 

pnncipalljr    ^m 


irith  Christ  (a  generation  of  professing  peopU')  do  lift  up  their 
keel  ogainet  liis  Sabbath.  So  that,  what  could  not  formerly  be 
done  against  it  hy  angels  of  darkness,  tlie  old  serpcut  takes 
SDolber  course  to  effect  it,  by  seeming  angels  of  light ;  who,  by  a 
Dew  device,  are  raised  up  to  build  the  scpulehers  of  those  who 
per»eeated  tlie  prophets  in  former  limes,  and  to  justify  all  the 
books  of  sporU,  and  the  reading  of  ihem  ;  yea  ail  the  former  and 
pretcnl  profanations ;  yea,  scoffs  and  scorns  against  the  Uabbalh 
&y.  For  as  in  former  times  ihey  have  ceremonial! zed  it  out  of 
the  decalogue,  yet  by  human  eongtiliUio  have  retained  it  in  the 
cbnrch ;  so  these  of  later  times  have  spirilualixed  it  out  of  the 
deodogue.  yea,  oul  of  all  the  churches  in  the  world.  For  by 
making  the  Christian  Sabbath  to  be  only  a  spiritual  Sabbath  in 
the  bosom  of  God  out  of  Heb,  iv.,  they  hereby  abolish  a 
•efeDlb-dKy  Sttbbaih,  and  make  every  day  equally  a  Sabbath  to 
k  Clirisiiao  man.  This  I  hope  will  be  the  lost,  but  it  is  the  most 
•pecioiu  and  fiiircsl  color  and  banner  that  ever  was  erected  to 
Sgbt  under  against  the  Christian  Sabbath  ;  aiid  is  most  Hi  lo  dc' 
■etre.  not  only  some  sodden  men  of  loose  and  wanton  wits,  but 
capeeially  men  of  spiritual,  but  too  shallow  minds.     In  limes  of 

(as  these  are  reputed  lo  be.)  Satan  comes  not  abroad  usually 
to  deceive  with  fleshly  and  gross  forgeries  and  his  cloven  foot, 
(for  every  one  almost  would  then  discern  his  hallings,)  but  with 

mystical,  yet  strong  delusions,  and  invLtible  chains  of  dark- 

'iriiereby  he  binds  his  captives  the  faster  to  the  judgment  of 
day-  Aud  therefore  the  watchword  given  in  the  bright 
ng'  times  of  the  apostle  was,  to   try  tlie  spirits,  and 

re  Dot  every  spirit.  And  take  heed  of  spirits,  who  indeed 
were  only  fleshly  and  corrupt  men,  yet  called  spirits,  because 
they  pretended  lo  have  much  of  the  Spirit,  and  their  doctrines 
only  to  advance  the  spirit ;  the  fittest  and  fairest  cobwebs 
:ve  and  entangle  the  world,  in  those  discerning  times,  that 

ly  eould  be  spun  out  of  the  poisonful  bowels  of  corrupt  and 



The   limes  are   now  ron 
nlly  of  the  old  monks,  i 

wherein,  by  the  refined  myi 
only  the  Sabbath,  but  also 





ordinaneea  of  Clirisl  in  ihe  New  Testament,  are  allegorized  and 
spiriiualized  out  of  the  world.  And  therefore  it  is  no  marvel, 
when  thej  abolish  the  outward  Sabbath,  because  of  a  spiritual 
Sabbath  ill  Christ,  if  (through  God's  righteous  judgment  blinding 
their  hearts)  thej  be  also  lell  to  reject  the  outward  word,  because 
of  an  inward  word  to  teach  them ;  and  outward  baptism  and 
Iiord's  supper,  because  of  an  inward  baptism  bj  the  Holy 
Ghoiit,  and  spiritual  bread  from  heaven,  the  Lord  Christ  Jesus ; 
.  and  all  outward  ordinances,  ministries,  churches,  because  of  an 
luward  kingdom  and  temple.  And  the  argument  will  hold 
Btronglj,  that  if  because  they  have  an  inward  Sabbath  of  rest 
in  the  bosom  of  Christ,  (which  I  deny  not,)  that  they  may  there- 
fore cast  away  all  enlernal  Sabbaths,  they  may  then  very  well 
reject  all  outward  baptism.  Lord's  supper,  all  churches,  all  or- 
dinances, because  herein  there  is  also  the  inward  baptism  — 
spiritual  feeding  upon  Christ,  and  inward  kingdom  and  temple 
of  Got!.  But  thus  tlipy  wickedly  separate  and  sever  what  God 
halb  joined  and  may  well  stand  logether,  through  the  madness  of 
which  hellish  practice  I  have  long  observed  almost  all  the  lale 
iind  most  pernicious  errors  of  these  times  arise  ;  and  those  men 
who  have  formerly  wept  for  God's  precious  Sabbaths  and  ordi- 
nances, and  have  prayed  for  them,  and  pleaded  for  them,  and 
have  offered  their  lives  in  sacrifice  for  them,  and  fought  for  them, 
yea,  that  hath  felt  perhaps  the  comfort,  sweetness,  and  blessing 
of  God's  Sabbatlis,  yea,  the  redeeming  and  saving  power  of  God's 
ordinances  to  their  own  souls,  yet  through  pretenses  of  more 
epiritual  enjoyments  above,  and  beyond,  and  without  all  these, 
ihey  can  part  wiih  these  their  old  friends  without  weeping,  and 
reject  them  as  polluted  rags,  and  fleshly  forms,  and  dork  veils  and 
curtains  which  must  be  drawn  aside,  that  so  they  may  nol  hinder 
the  true  light  from  shining  in  them.  ^ 

This,  therefore,  is  the  reason  why  the  love  of  many  at  this 
day  is  grown  cold  toward  the  external  Sabbath,  because  the  in- 
^  temal  and  spiritual  Sabbath  is  now  all  in  all.  And  therefore 
many  men  walk  either  with  bold  consciences,  and  will  observe 
no  Sabbath,  of  eke  with  loose  consciences,  thinking  it  lawful  lo 


ofaeerve  il.  (if  men  will  enjoin  it,)  but  not  thinking  ih&t  they  are 
tied  and  bound  thereunto  from  any  precept  of  God.  That  place 
of  Ueb.  iv.  which  they  bo  oiueU  siit^k  Id,  wanis  not  light  to 
dciDonsirale  iliat  the  SahbatiBm  ihere  may  well  agree  not  only 
with  the  internal,  bul  the  oulward  Chrialian  Sabbath.  But  some 
of  the  ensuing  thc^s  will  serve  to  clear  up  these  things.  This 
only  I  fear,  that  because  of  these  indignities  done  thus  to  God's 
Sabbaths,  even  by  the  underworkings  of  some  of  God's  own  poo- 
pk,  tliat  the  lime  hastens,  wherein  if  no  man  should  speak,  yet 
tlie  right  hand  of  the  sore  displea-iure  of  a  provoked  God,  by 
plagues  and  confusion  upon  ihe  glory  of  all  flesh,  will  plead  for 
bis  own  name,  and  for  that  in  special  which  is  engraven  upon  the 
forehead  of  bis  holy  Sabbaths.  Jerusalem  remembered  wiib 
r^ret  of  heart,  in  the  days  of  her  affliction  and  misery,  all  her 
pleasant  things,  and  especially  this  of  the  Sabbath.  (Lam.  i.  7.) 
If  the  days  of  our  re#l  and  quietness  can  not  make  us  to  relish 
the  good  things  of  his  temple  in  ihe  fruition  of  our  Sabbaihs, 
then  doubt  not  of  iI,  but  that  the  days  of  our  aflliction  shall 
tnalM)  n  remnant  lo  remember  that  they  were  pleasant  thingti. 
Of  ail  Ihe  mercies  of  God  to  Israel,  this  is  reckoned  to  be  one 
of  llie  grcale«l,  that  be  gave  bis  laws  to  Israel,  (Ps.  cxivii.  19, 
SO :)  and  of  all  laws,  ihb  of  the  Sabbath  ;  for  so  the  remnant 
ot  the  capliviiy  acknowledged  il,  (Neli.  ix.  14.)  who  perhaps 
bad  far  lower  thoughts  of  it  before  their  bondage.  And  if  the 
very  making  of  it  known  be  such  a  sweet  mercy,  what  ttien  is 
the  rest  and  peace  of  it,  the  blessing  and  comfort  of  il  ?  for 
which  I  doubt  not  but  many  thousands  are  admiring  God  in 
baa(6n  at  litis  day.  And  shall  u  shady  imagination  of  an  every- 
dtjr  Sabbalfa  make  us  sell  away  fur  nothing  such  a  heavenly  and 
fndom  eeoMin,  and  make  it  common  ?  The  Lord  Jesus  wished 
bu  disciplea  to  pray  llial  their  Hight  from  Jerusalem  might  not 
bo  in  winter,  nor  on  the  Sahbnih  day,  (Matu  xxiv.  20,)  account- 
ing it  a  great  misery  that  his  people  should  lose  the  public  benefit 
(tliraugb  the  disturbance  of  any)  of  one  Subhuth  day;  (fo 
it  Jewish  or  Christian  Sabbath,  1  now  dispute  not 
vm  m  Sal^baih  day,  which  it  set^ms  was  to  conliime  alYer  Chfi»t* 


3r  ho        -  H 



ascension  to  the  Father,  and  therefore  not  irhoUj  ceivmonial.) 
And  Bhftll  we  account  it  no  affiietion  or  misery  to  fight  or  fly,  to 
ride  or  go,  to  work  or  plaj,  to  hear  the  word  in  public  or  stay 
at  home  upon  tlie  Sabbath  day  ?  Is  it  no  mercy  in  these  days  to 
enjoy  many  Sabbaths,  which  was  ao  sore  a  misery  in  Christ's 
"  account,  and  in  the  apostles'  days  to  lose  but  one  ?  "  If  man's 
heart  be  lost  in  the  necessary  cumbers  of  the  week,  (upon  the 
Sabbatli,)  the  Lord  is  wont  to  rccaU  it  again  \o  him.  If  any 
fear  that  the  time  of  grace  is  past,  tlie  continuance  of  the  Sab- 
baths (the  special  seasons  of  grace)  confutes  Lim.  If  a  man's 
Bonl  be  wearied  with  daily  griefs  and  outward  troubles,  Ihe 
bosom  of  Jesus  Christ  (which  is  in  special  wise  opened  every 
Lord's  day)  may  refresh  him.  And  shall  we  have  and  profess  so 
little  love  to  such  a  time  (more  precions  than  gold  to  humbled 
hearts)  as  to  cast  away  such  a  rich  portion  of  precious  time,  and 
make  it  common,  under  a  pretense  of  making  every  day  a  Sab- 
bath, which  is  cither  impossible  to  do  or  sinful  ?  The  loudest 
voice  (one  of  thom  of  the  love  of  Christ)  which  now  sounds  in 
the  world  continually  in  the  ears  of  his  people,  is  this :  Come 
into  my  bosom,  ye  weary  sinners,  and  enjoy  your  rest.  And  the 
next  voice  lo  that  is  this  of  the  Sabbalh,  to  call  us  off  from  all 
occasions,  and  then  lo  say  to  us,  Come  to  me,  my  people,  and  rest 
in  my  bosom  of  sweetest  mercy  all  this  day ;  which  call  would 
not  he  a  mercy  if  it  were  every  day  ;  for  then  our  own  occasions 
must  be  neglected,  which  the  wise  and  fatherly  providence  of  God 
forbids,  and  spiritual  work  only  mindecl  and  intended,  which  God 
did  never  command.  Nor  should  any  marvel  that  the  voice  of 
the  law  should  contain  such  a  voice  of  love,  and  therefore  should 
not  think  thai  this  controversy  about  the  law  (or  for  ihb  one  law 
of  the  Sabbalh)  is  unlit  and  unsuitable  lo  these  evangelical  and 
gospel  limes  ;  for  although  ihe  law  is  dreadful  and  full  of  terror 
as  considered  wiiboiit  Christ,  and  is  lo  man  fallen  a  voice  of 
words  and  a  voice  of  terror  and  fear,  which  genders  unto  bond- 
age, yet  as  it  is  revealed  with  reference  to  Christ,  and  n  people 
in  Christ,  so  every  commandment  doth  tpirare  amorem,  (as  he 
Bpeaks,)  and  breathes  out  Christ's  love,  for  which  the  sainls  can 

not  but  blese  the  Lord  with  everloeliDg  wonderment  (hat  e 
he  made  ihem  to  know  these  heart  secreCa  of  bU  good  will  and 
love,  especitLlly  then  when  he  writes  them  in  titeir  beans,  and 
thereby  gives  uoto  them  the  comforl  ihereof.  And  verily  if  it 
be  BDch  a  sweet  voice  of  love  to  call  us  in  to  this  reat  of  the  dny, 
certainly  if  ever  ihe  English  nation  be  deprived  of  these  seasons, 
(which  God  in  men^y  forbid,)  it  will  be  a  black  appearance  of 
God  against  them  in  the  days  of  their  distress,  when  he  i 
■eem  to  shut  them  out  of  his  rest  in  his  bosom  by  depriving  ibem 
of  the  reel  of  this  day.  What  will  ye  do  in  the  solemn  day,  i 
tbo  day  of  ibe  feast  of  the  Ix)rd  ?  For  lo,  they  are  gone  beiause 
of  destruction  i  Egypt  shall  gather  them,  Memphis  shall  bury 
Uiem,  their  silver  slmll  be  dosired,  nettles  shidl  possess  them, 
Ibonu  «hall  be  in  their  tabemaclea ;  ihe  days  of  visitation  £ 
oomc,  the  days  of  recompense  are  come,  Israel  shall  know  itj 
ibe  prophet  is  a  fool,  the  spirilual  man  is  mad,  for  the  multitude 
ot  thine  iniqaity,  and  the  great  hatred.  (IIos.  ix.  5-7.)  But  let 
men  yet  make  much  of  God's  Sabbaths,  and  begin  here  ;  and  if 
it  be  too  tedious  to  draw  near  to  God  every  day,  let  them  but 
make  consciuiice  of  trying  and  tasting  how  good  the  Lord  is  but 
lhi»  one  day  io  a  week,  and  the  Lord  will  yet  reserve  mercy  for 
U*  people,  (Jer.  xvii.  H-26  ;)  for  keep  thb,  keep  all ;  lose  this, 
lose  all ;  wliich  lest  I  should  seem  to  plead  for  out  of  a  frothy 
and  graundlesi  affection  to  the  day,  and  lest  any  in  these  times 
■hould  be  woree  than  the  crane  and  the  swallow,  who  know  their 
times  of  return.  I  have  therefore  endeavored  to  clear  up  those 
Jbur   gr«at  difficulties  about  this  day,  in   the    theses  here  fol- 

].  Concerning  the  morality. 

8.  The  change. 

S.  The  beginning. 

4.  The  sanctification  of  the  Sabbath. 

Being  fully  persuaded  that  whosoever  shall  break  one  of  the 
leaat  eammandraents,  and  teach  men  so,  shall  be  called  least  ii 
Uie  kingdom  uf  God.     I  do  therefore  desire  the  reader  t 
kkng  with  lum  these  two  things :  — 

r  to  take  I 



Suappndin^  liLa  judpnent  concerning  Ihe  trulli  and  validilj 

of  any  part  or  of  any  particular  thesis  until  he  Lath  read  o^er  the 
whole  ;  for  Ihey  have  n  dependence  one  upon  another  for  mutual 
clearing  of  one  another ;  and  lest  I  should  iiV  cocliim  apponere, 
Knd  eay  the  eame  thing  twice,  1  have  therefore  purposely  left  out 
that  in  one  part,  and  one  thesis  which  is  to  be  cleared  in  another, 
either  for  proof  of  it,  or  resolution  of  objections  against  it ;  and 
nllhough  litis  dependence  may  not  so  easily  appear,  (because  I 
have  not  so  expressly  eet  down  the  method,)  yet  Ihe  wise- 
hearted,  I  hope,  will  easily  find  it  out,  or  else  pick  out  and  accept 
what  they  see  to  be  of  God,  in  such  a  confused  Iieap ;  for  it  was 
enough  to  my  ends  if  I  might  lay  in  any  broken  pieces  of  limber 
to  fonvard  this  building,  which  those  that  are  able  to  wade  deeper 
controversy  may  please  to  make  use  of  (if  there  be 
any  thing  in  them,  or  in  any  of  them)  in  their  own  better  and 
1  orderly  frame ;  for  it  hath  been,  and  still  is,  my  earnest 
desire  to  heaven,  that  God  would,  raise  up  some  or  other  of  his 
precious  servants  to  clear  up  these  controversies  more  fully  than 
yet  they  have  been,  that  the  zeal  for  God's  Sabbaths  may  not  be 
fire  without  light,  which  perhaps  hath  hitherto  been  too  little, 
through  the  wickedness  of  former  times,  encouraging  the  bvoks 
one  way,  and  suppressing  those  of  most  weight  and  worth  for 

2.  To  consider  that  I  do  most  willingly  give  way  to  the  pub- 
I  lishing  of  these  things,  which  I  could  in  many  respects  have 
much  more  readily  committed  to  the  fire  llian  to  the  light ;  when 
I  consider  the  great  abilitiea  of  others  ;  the  need  auch  as  I  am 
have  to  sit  down  and  leam  i  the  hazards  and  knocks  men  get 
only  by  coming  but  into  the  field  in  polemical  matters,  and  the 
tinusefulness  of  any  thing  herein  for  those  in  remote  places, 
where  knowledge  abounds,  and  where  to  cast  any  thing  of  this 
nature  is  to  cast  water  into  the  sea.  I  confess  I  am  ashamed 
therefore  to  be  seen  in  this  garment ;  and  therefore  that  1  have 
(thus  far  yielded,  hath  been  rather  to  please  others  than  myself, 
iwho  have  many  ways  compelled  rae  hereunto.  /The  things  for 
■nbstauce  contained  herein  were  first  preached  in  my  ordinary 



Course,  upou  the  Sabbath  dnys,  ia  opening  the  commanilmenta. 
The  desires  of  iomu  studenu  in  (he  i-'ollegc,  and  the  need  I  saw 
of  resolving  some  doubtn  arising  about  these  ihingd  in  the  hearts 
of  foine  ordinary  hearers  among  the  people,  oceasiuned  a  more 
large  discussing  of  the  conirovewy  ;  to  wliich  I  was  tlie  tnorc  in- 
clined, b«(^niiee  one  among  u.'<  (who  ivunted  not  abilities)  was 
taken  awaj  from  us,  who  hud  promised  the  clearing  up  of  all 
these  Diatteri.  When  therefore  these  things  were  more  plainly 
and  fully  opened  and  applied  lo  the  coneciences  of  some  more 
popular  capacities  as  well  as  others,  I  was  then  put  upon  it  to 
reduce  the  doctrinal  part  of  these  sermons  upon  the  fourth  com- 
maodmenl  into  certain  theses,  for  the  use  of  some  students  de- 
sirous thereof;  when  being  scattered,  and  coming  lo  the  view  of 
wme  of  the  elders  in  ihe  country,  I  was  by  some  of  (hem  desired 
lo  take  off  some  obscurity  arising  from  Ihe  brevity  and  littleness 
of  ihem,  by  greater  enlargements,  and  a  few  more  explicationa 
cf  them  ;  which  promising  lo  do,  and  ihen  coming  lo  the  hearing 
oT  many,  I  was  then  desired  by  all  the  elders  in  the  country, 
ihen  met  together,  lo  commit  them  to  public  view  ;  which  hitherto 
my  hettrt  bath  opposed,  and  therefore  should  still  have  smothered 
(hem,  but  that  some  have  so  far  com[)elled  me,  as  that  I  feared  I  I 
abonld  insist  and  fight  against  God  in  not  listening  to  them ;  in  | 
which  many  things  are  left  out,  which  perhaps  might  be  more 
ineful  lo  a  plain  people,  which  then,  in  the  application  of  matters 
of  doctrine,  were  publicly  delivered  ;  and  some  few  things  are 
kiUoJ,  especial  m  that  particular,  wherein  the  directive  power 
of  lli«  moral  law  is  cleared  against  the  loose  wits  of  these  limes. 
We  are  strangers  hero  (for  the  most  part)  lo  the  books  an3 
vriiiog*  which  are  now  in  Europe  ;  but  it  is  much  feared  that  tb^ 
inovastt  and  growth  of  the  many  tares  and  erroj^in  England 
have  been  by  reason  of  the  sleepiness  of  some  of  the  honest  hus- 
batidtnen ;  and  lliat  those  who  are  best  able  to  pluck  them  up 
hsn  nM  veasonably  stood  in  the  gap,  and  kept  them  out  by  a 
MmIobb  convicilug  and  public  bearing  witness  against  them  bj 
wofd  and  writing ;  and  tliat,  therefore,  such  as  have  with  tooj 
mpllanco  tolerated  errors,  error  will  OM 



b  Icnderness  and  c 



day  grow  up  to  tliat  head  that  it  will  not  tolerate  or  suffer  tbem 
to  sp«fik  Iniih.  We  have  a  proverb  here,  that  "  the  devil  is  not 
»o  soon  risen  but  Christ  is  up  before  him ; "  and  if  any  of  his 
precious  aervanla  have  slept  and  lain  longer  abed  than  their 
Master  hath  done,  and  have  not  spoken  or  printed  soon  enough 
for  Jesus  Christ  in  other  matters,  yet  O  that  in  this  matter  of 
the  Sabbath  God  would  betimes  awaken,  and  that  lliese  weak- 
nesses might  stir  up  their  strength  ;  for  I  much  fear  and  foresee 
that  if  it  be  not  done,  there  is  an  hour  and  a  nick  of  templation 
in  such  a  juncture  of  times  approaching,  wherein  the  enemy  will 
come  in  like  a  flood,  and  rise  up  from  all  quarters  against  the 
doctrine  of  the  Sabbath,  and  then  farewell  all  the  good  days  of 
the  Son  of  man,  if  this  be  lost,  which  then  men  shall  desire  to 
Bee,  and  shall  not  see  them,  I  have  therefore  been  the  more 
wilting  to  let  my  own  shame  and  weakness  appear  to  the  world, 
(if  so  it  be  found,)  if  this  might  be  any  means  of  doing  the  least 
good  for  keeping  up  the  price  of  God's  Sabbalhs  in  the  hearts 
of  any,  I  have  therefore  spent  the  more  lime  about  the  morality 
of  the  Sabbalh,  because  the  clearing  op  of  this  gives  light  to  all 
the  rest. 



Tkent  1.  Tm  is  one  of  the  most  precious  blessings  which 
worthless  man  in  this  world  enjoys;  a  jewel  of  inestimable 
worth ;  a  golden  stream,  dissolving,  and,  as  it  were,  continually 
mnning  down  bj  us,  out  of  one  etemitj  into  another,  yet  seldom 
taken  notice  of  until  it  is  quite  passed  away  from  us.  Man  (saith 
Solomon)  knows  not  his  time.  (Eccl.  ix.  12.)  It  is,  therefore, 
most  just  and  meet  that  He  who  hatli  the  disposing  of  all  other 
things  less  precious  and  momentous  should  abo  be  the  supreme 
Lord  and  Disposer  of  all  our  times. 

Tresis  2.  He  who  is  the  Disposer  of  all  our  times  is  the 
sovereign  Lord  of  our  persons  also,  ajid  is  therefore  the  utmost 
and  last  end  of  both ;  for  if  our  persons  and  all  our  times  be  of 
him,  they  are  then  to  be  improved  for  him,  as  he  sees  most  meet. 

T%e$it  3.  Now,  although  all  creatures  in  the  world  are  of 
God,  and  for  God,  so  that,  being  of  him,  they  receive  their  being 
from  him  as  their  first  efllcient,  and  being  for  him,  are  therefore 
preserved  and  governed  by  him  as  their  utmost  end;  yet  no  other 
inferior  visible  creature  is  set  so  near  to  Grod,  and  consequently 
is  not  in  that  manner  for  God,  as  man  is. 

Tresis  4.  For  although  all  inferior  creatures  are  made  lastly 
for  Grod,  yet  they  are  made  nextly  for  man ;  but  man,  having 
nothing  better  than  himself,  between  hiin  and  Qod,  is  therefore 
made  both  lastly  and  nextly  for  Grod ;  and  hence  it  is  that  no  in- 
ferior creature,  which  coines  out  and  issueth  from  Grod,  hath  such 
a  reflux  and  return  again  back  unto  Grod,  as  man  hath ;  because, 
in  and  by  this  reflux  and  return  into  him,  man's  immortal  being 
is  eternally  preserved,  like  water  running  into  the  sea  again, 
from  whence  it  first  came. 

nesis  5.     For  whatever  is  set  next,  and,  as  it  were,  contig- 
uous to  eternal,  is  eternal :   Omne  contiguum  atemo  tpirituali  est 
mUmumj  (say  some,)  and  hence  it  is  that  the  soul  is  eternal^ 
TOL.  ni.  3  25 




ixlly  made, 
IS  It  were,  in  a  straiglit 
□  of  vrkich  slraight  line 
in,  tliey  ihen 


because  it  is  made  ncxtly  for  Gotl,  anil  as  it  were  contiguous  to 
him.  The  body  also  shall  be  eternal,  because  contiguous  lo  the 
eternal  souL  Bui  no  oilier  inferior  creatures  are  thus  eternal ; 
for  allhongh  they  be  made  nexlly  for  man,  yet  so  as  ihat  they 
are  firstly  tor  the  body,  which  is  of  itself  mortal,  and  not  eternal, 
and  thei-efore,  not  being  contiguous  lo  that  which  is  spiritually 
eternal,  are  not  so  themselres  ;  and  the  reason  of  this  is,  because 
all  inferior  creatures,  as  they  come  out  from  God,  so  their 
motion  is  toward  man,  for  whom  they 
they  go  out  straightforward  from  God, 
lino  toward  man,  to  the  last  end  and  tei 
when  they  are  come,  in  the  service  oi 

proceed  any  farther,  and  do  therefore  perish  and  cease  to  be, 
without  reflecting,  or  returning  back  again  immediately  unto 
Cod.  But  man,  being  made  immediately  and  nextiy  for  God, 
halh  therefore  his  motion  so  toward  God  as  that  he  returns  im- 
mediately unto  him  again,  and  is  not  ted  in  a  straight  line,  but 
led  (as  it  were)  about  in  a  circular  motion,  and  hence  returninf; 
immediately  lo  him,  he  is  hereby  eternally  preserved  in 
for  whom  he  is  immediately  made,  and  unto  whom  he  is  r 
contiguous,  as  hath  been  said. 

TSem  6.  Now,  although,  in  this  return  of  man  to  God,  (sup- 
posing it  to  be  iniemal,  regular,  and  spiritual,)  man's  blessed 
being  once  lost  is  hereby  recovered  and  preserved  in  God,  yet 
when  man  is  left  unto  himself,  the  motions  of  his  soul  out  of  this 
circle,  in  straying  from  God,  are  innumerable,  and  would  be  end- 
less, if  God,  who  set  him  next  unto  himself,  did  not  some  time 
or  other  recall,  return,  and  lead  him  back  agtun  (as  it  were  in  a 
lieavenly  circle)  into  himself. 

TTieiii  7.  Look,  therefore,  as  when  man  hath  run  his  race, 
finished  his  course,  and  passed  through  the  bigger  and  larger 
circle  of  his  life,  he  then  returns  unio  his  eternal  rest,  so  it  is 
contrived  and  ordered  by  divine  wisdom,  as  that  he  shall  in  a 
special  manner  return  unto  and  into  his  rest  once  at  least  within 
the  lesser  and  smaller  circle  of  every  week,  that  so  his  perfect 
blessedness  to  come  might  be  foretasted  every  Sabbath  day,  and 
BO  be  begun  here  ;  that  look,  as  man  elanding  in  innocency  bad 
cause  thus  to  return  from  the  pleiisant  labors  of  his  weekly 
paradise  employments,  (as  shall  lie  shown  in  due  place,)  so  man 
fallen  much  more  from  his  toilsome  and  wearisome  labors,  lo 
this  his  rest  again.  And  therefore,  as  because  ail  creatures  were 
made  for  man,  man  was  therefore  made  in  the  last  place  after 
tbem  ;  so  man  being  made  for  God  and  his  worship,  thence  it  {■ 
that  the  Sabbath   (wherein  oi^n  waa  to  dr: 




God)  was  appointed  aller  lli«^  creation  of  man,  as  Peter  Martyr  " 
ribnervea,  tor  although  man  is  not  made  fur  tlie  .Sabbath  merely 
in  respect  of  the  outward  reat  of  it,  ad  the  PhHrisees  dreamed, 
yet  he  ia  made  for  the  Sabbath  in  respect  of  God  in  it,  and  the 
hulinesd  of  it,  to  both  which,  then,  the  soul  is  to  have  its  weekly 
rcvoliilion  back  again,  as  into  that  rest  which  is  the  eod  of  all 
our  lives,  labor,  and  in  e|>eciBl  of  all  our  weekly  labor  and  work. 
77iait  8.  As,  therefore,  our  blessed  rest  in  the  fruition  of 
Gu(i  at  the  end  and  period  of  our  Lves  ia  no  ceremony,  but  a 
glorious  privilege  and  a  moral  duty,  it  being  onr  closing  with 
our  utmost  end  to  which  we  are  called,  so  it  can  not  be  tliat  such 
a  law  which  calls  and  commands  man  in  this  life  to  return  to 
the  some  rest  for  ttubstonce  every  Sabbath  day,  should  be  a  cer- 
emonial, but  rather  a  moral  and  perpetual  law ;  unless  it  should 
appear  that  this  weekly  Sabbath,  like  the  other  annual  Sabbath, 
hath  been  ordained  and  instituted  principally  for  some  ceremo- 
Diona  ends,  rather  than  lo  lie  a  pan,  and  indeed  the  beginning 
ofoorre^t  to  come;  there  being  little  difference  between  this 
1  tlut  to  eome,  but  only  this,  tliat  here  our  rest  is  but  begun, 
Ihere  it  is  perfected  ;  here  it  is  interrupted  by  our  weekly  labors, 
there  it  is  continued  ;  here  we  are  led  into  our  rest  by  means  and 
Ordhtances.  but  there  wo  shall  be  possessed  with  it  without  our 
nrtd  of  any  help  from  them ;  our  God,  who  is  our  real,  being 
'    then  become  unto  us  immediately  all  in  all. 

7%ettt  9.  Were  it  not  for  roan's  work  and  labor  ordained 
ad  appointed  for  him  in  this  life,  he  should  enjoy  a  continual 
BablMtlh.  a  perpetual  rest.  And  therefore  we  see  that  when 
BUUi'*  life  is  ended,  his  sun  set,  and  his  work  done  upon  earth. 
nothing  else  remains  for  him  but  only  to  enter  into  his  perpetual 
and  eternal  rest.  All  our  time  should  be  solemn  and  sacred  to 
I  the  Lioni  of  time,  if  there  were  no  common  work  and  labor 
J  bcre,  which  necessarily  occasions  common  time ;  why,  then, 
abouU  any  think  that  a  weekly  Sahbalb  is  ceremonial,  when, 
were  it  not  for  this  life's  labor,  a  perpetual  and  continual  Sab- 
bath wonld  then  be  undoubtedly  "accounted  moral.  It  is  hard 
for  any  to  think  a  servant's  awful  allendance  of  his  Lord  and 
Matter  at  certain  special  times  not  lo  be  morally  due  from  him, 
who,  bat  for  some  more  private  and  personal  pccasions  allowed 
him  to  attend  unto,  should  at  all  times  conlinually  be  serving 

*  Tm  hk  onlinvm  coniidera.  aija  cnwuiur  pmplcr  liomineai,  idco  po't  ilia 
eeadilBr  hano.  Homo  vcio  od  l>ei  i-olturu  idea  BUtim  pobi  illiiu  crumiloa 
■■  Sobbotbi  Iwoediciio  tt  laociificatio  iaducitor,  —  Pti.  Mart,  in  Pnae.  4  m. 



Hiexii  10.  The  word  ia  iyijittfor,  and  no  Scripture  phraae, 
and  llieretbre  not  proper  fillj  and  fully  to  express  the  question 
in  conlroverey,  to  wit,  whether  llie  fourth  commatidraent  be  & 
moral  precept.  The  best  friends  of  this  word  find  it  slippery, 
and  can  hardlj  tell  what  it  is,  and  what  they  would  hare  to  be 
understood  by  it.  and  hence  it  is  become  a  bone  of  much  conten- 
tion, a  fit  mist,  aiid  swamp  for  bucIi  to  fight  in,  who  deiiire  so  to 
contend  with  their  adverBariea  as  that  ihemaetvea  may  not  be 
Lknown,  either  where  they  are  or  on  what  ground  they  stand. 
Tet  it  being  a  word  generally  taken  up  and  comnioiily  used,  it 
may  not  therefore  be  amiss  to  follow  the  market  meanure,  and  to 
retain  the  word  with  just  and  meet  explications  thereof. 

TlienM  11.  They  who  describe  a  moral  law  to  be  such  a  law 
as  is  not  typically  ceremonial,  and  therefore  not  durable,  do  well 
and  truly  espreas  what  it  is  not,  but  they  do  not  positively  ex- 
preM  what  it  is. 

Tliesii  12.  Some  describe  and  draw  out  the  proportions  of 
the  moral  law  by  the  law  of  nature,  and  so  make  it  to  be  that 
law  which  every  man  h  taught  by  the  light  of  nature.  "  That 
which  is  morally  and  universally  just,  (say  some,)  which  reason, 
when  it  is  not  misled,  and  the  inward  law  of  nature  dictaleth,  by 
common  principles  of  honesty,  or  ought  to  dictate  unto  all  men 
without  any  outward  usher.  It  is  that  (say  others)  which  may 
be  proved  not  only  just,  hut  necessary,  by  principles  drawn  from 
the  light  of  nature,  which  all  reasonable  men,  even  in  nature  cor- 
rupted, have  still  in  their  hearts,  which  either  they  do  acknowl- 
e<^,  or  may  at  least  be  convinced  of  without  the  Scriptures,  by 
principles  stJU  lull  in  ihe  hearts  of  all  men."  But  this  descrip- 
tion seems  loo  narrow;  tor,  1.  Although  it  bo  true  that  the  law 
natural  is  part  of  tlie  law  moral,  yet  if  the  law  moral  be  resolved 
into  the  law  of  nature  only,  and  the  law  of  nature  be  shrunk  up 
and  drawn  into  so  narrow  a  compass  as  what  the  principles  left 
in  corrupt  man  only  suggest  and  dictate,  then  it  will  necessarily 
follow,  that  many  of  those  holy  rules  and  principles  are  not  the 
law  of  nature,  which  were  the  most  perfect  impressions  of  the 
law  of  nature  in  man's  first  creation  and  perfeciiou.  but  now,  by 
man's  apostasy,  are  obliterated  and  blotted  out;  unless  any  shall 
think  worse  than  the  blind  Papists,  either  that  man's  mind  is  not 
now  corrupted  by  the  fait,  in  losing  any  of  the  first  impressions 
of  innouenl  nature,  or  shall  maintain,  with  them,  that  the  image 
of  God  (of  which  those  fii'st  impressions  were  a  pari)  was  not 
natural  to  man  in  that  estate.  2.  It  will  then  follow  that  there 
ia  no  moral  discipline,  (as  they  call  it,)  that  is,  nothing  moral 
discipline   informing,  or  positively  moral,   but  only  by 

U  there        ^ 
loral  by       ^M 



du-taling,  wbieb  is  cross  not  only  lo  the  judgments,  but  Bolid  arKu- 
nent?,  of  men  judicious  and  most  indiffcreiil.  3.  If  Ibat  only  ie  • 
to  be  accountcil  raoral  which  ia  bo  eit&ilj  known  of  b)1  men,  by 
die  light  of  naiure  corrupted,  then  the  imperfect  light  of  man's 
corrupt  mind  must  be  the  principal  judge  of  that  which  is  moral,  . 
nlher  than  the  perfect  rule  of  mornlily  contnined  in  the  Scrip-  , 
tnr«,  which  aa^riion  would  not  a  little  advance  corrupt  anil  blind  ' 
tulure,  and  dethrone  ihe  perfection  of  the  Holy  Scripture, 

7H«ii  13.  They  who  define  a  moral  law  lo  be  such  a  law 
AS  is  |ierpetual  and  universal,  binding  all  persons  in  all  ages  and 
times,  do  come  somewhat  nearer  to  the  mark,  nud  arc  not  far  o(F 
from  the  truth,  and  guch  a  description  is  moat  plain  and  obviouB 
to  «uch  ta  are  not  curious ;  and  in  this  sense  our  adversaries  in 
ihb  cause  affirm  the  Sabbath  not  to  be  raoral,  meaning  ibat  it 
n  not  a  law  perjielual  and  universal.  Others,  on  the  coutrary,  ' 
affirming  that  it  is  moral,  intend  thus  much  —  that  it  is  perpetual 
ind  universal,  a  law  which  hinds  all  persons,  all  times,  and  in  all 
■gei ;  and  herein  lies  the  chief  matter  of  controversy  at  this  day. 
Kow  in  what  re.<pect  and  how  far  tbnh  the  law  of  the  Sabbath  ' 
is  perpetual,  ^hall  be  hereafter  shown ;  meanwhile  it  may  not  be 
HnLiB  U>  inquire  more  narrowly  into  the  nature  of  a  moral  law. 
For  (bough  a  kwprim^|ilj.5iffl2lisp5ri;glj)al,  yet  perpetuity 
Mems  to  be  an  adjunct~nilEer  than  ortneessence  of  a  moral  law, 
■nd  ibe  difficulty  will  still  remain  nntoucbed,  viz.,  to  know  when 
ft  law  ia  perpetual,  and  nhat  is  internal  and  Intrinsioal  to  such  a 
law  as  makes  it  perpetual,  or  moral ;  whcreinlo  I  would  not 
•CATch,  lest  I  should  seem  to  afiecl  curiosity,  but  that  our  critical 
■drersaries  put  us  u{)on  it,  with  whom  there  is  nothing  lost  in 
W«  we  gnin  nothing  by  wrestling  a  little  with  them  upon  their 
own  grounds,  where  for  a  while  we  sliall  come  up  lo  them. 

Thtii$  14.  A  divine  law  may  be  said  to  he  moral  two  ways. 
1.  More  largely  and  generally  moral.  2.  More  strictly  and 
^keciall  j  moral. 

Thftii  15.  A  law  generally  moral  is  this  —  that  the  whole 
uneniga  will  of  the  Lord  be  done  and  submitted  unto  by  every 
«r«alur«i  and  in  this  large  sense,  every  law  of  God.  whelhor 
ceremonial,  judicial,  or  for  special  trial,  may  be  said  to  be  moral, 
beeoiue  ihc  sovereign  will  of  God  is  in  all  these  laws  to  bo 
adund.  It  is  a  raoral  duty  that  God's  will  be  done  ;  and  hence 
k  b  that  so  far  forth  as  the  will  of  God  is  in  ibeiii,  so  far  forth  io 
yield  obedience  to  them  is  a  moral  duty ;  but  the  question  is  not 
alxMI  Ihi*  morality,  nor  what  things  are  thus  moral. 

1%nu  Iti.  A  law  more  strictly  and  specially  moral,  which 
ODBeenu  the  manners  of  all  meu,  uod  of  which  we  now  speak, 

P  30  TB 



Lmay  be  thus  dcBcrilicd ;  viz.,  it  ia  such  a  law,  whiuh  h  therefore 
commanded,  bccauGc  it  is  good,  and  ia  not  therefore  good  merely 
■■  TTietii  iT.  Thifi  is  Austin's  desfjipliun  of  it  long  Einc«,  whom 
most  of  the  schoolmen  follow ;  which  learned  Cameron,  with 
sundry  laie  writers,  confinns,  and  which  our  adversaries  in  Ihia 
conlroveray  plead  hard  for,  and  unto  which  the  evidence  of  Scrip- 
ture and  reason  seems  to  incline ;  for  laws  mt;rely  judicial  and 
I  ceremonial  are  good  laws,  (Deut.  vi,  18-.  24;)  but  this  was  merely 
[  beeauae  they  were  commanded,  and  therefore  it  had  been  simply 
evil  to  burn  incense,  oETcr  sacriliuc,  or  perform  any  ceremonial 
duty  in  the  worship  of  God,  untt*G9  tliey  had  been  commanded. 
What  is  there  therefore  in  moral  laws  which  is  not  in  those  laws  ? 
>  Verily,  this  inward  goodness  in  ihem  which  others  have  not,  and 
because  of  which  goodness  tliey  are  therefore  commanded ;  for 
to  love  God,  lo  honor  parents,  to  preserve  the  life  of  man,  to  be 
'  merciful,  and  bountiful,  and  just  in  all  our  dealings,  etc,  are  in- 
wardly good,  and  are  ihei'etbre  commanded,  and  are  therefore 
moral  laws ;  and  hence  we  see  that  when  Uie  a|>ostle  would  set 
forth  the  glory  and  excellency  of  the  moral  law,  (for  of  do  other 
law  can  he  speak,  Kom.  vii.  7, 1^,)  he  gives  these  titles  to  it  —  that 
it  is  holy,  juai,  and  good;  wliicli  holiness,  justice,  and  goodness 
he  opposeth  to  his  own  moriil  (not  ceremonial)  wickedness.  I 
fim  carnal,  (saith  'he,)  but  the  law  is  holy,  just,  and  good.  And 
look,  as  it  was  evil  in  itself  for  lo  have  a  nature  contrary  to  the 
law,  so  the  law  which  was  contrary  to  that  nature  was  good  in 
itself,  and  was  therefore  commanded  ;  and  therefore  in  this  thing 
moral  laws  are  in  a  higher  degree  good  than  such  as  were  only 
ceremonial,  which  were  therefore  good  merely  because  com- 
manded. The  prophet  Micnli  therefore  perceiving  how  forward 
many  were  in  ceremonial  duties  and  sacrifices,  in  opposition 
beruunio,  he  lells  them,  "  The  Lonl  hath  showed  thee,  O  man, 
what  is  good,"  (speaking  of  inoi-al  duties,  of  showing  mercy,  and 
walking  humbly  with  God,  Micah  vi.  8.)  Were  not  sacrifice  and 
offerings  good,  as  well  as  mercy  and  walking  humbly  ?  Yes, 
verily  ;  but  herein  lies  the  ditl'erence,  (ns  our  most  orihudox  gca- 
erally  make  it,)  sacrifice  and  offerings  were  not  per  le  and  in 
themselves  good,  but  only  as  commanded  for  higher  ends,  and  to 
further  moral  obedience,  (Jer.  vii.  22,  23,  and  vi.  I'J,  20.  Is.  i: 
14,  IG.  Ps.  1.  13-lJJ;)  hut  such  mural  obedience  as  the 
prophet  mentions,  viz.,  to  show  mercy  and  to  walk  humbly,  were 
good  in  thi.-mse)vefi,  and  were  therefore  commaiideil  of  God,  aniT 
here  called  by  the  prophet  good.  The  sum  of  moral  obedience  ii 
lore  to  God  and  man.  (Matt,  xxii.)     But  what  love  ie  this?  j 


I  tLeinsi.-lve9  lovely,  and  c 

» Surely  it  is  in  *ucU  things 
■equentlj-  in  themselves  good ;  lor  otherwise  oerenionial  obedience 
>hoaM  be  A  part  of  moral  obedience,  beeaiise  in  performing  such 
obedience  as  is  merely  ceremonial,  we  show  our  love  to  God  also, 
it  being  n  branch  of  love  to  Lave  respect  unto  all  God's  cotH' 
mandmenli.  (Dent.  vi.  1—3,  with  v.  G.)     Ouly  herein  our  love 
.  towttnl  God  appears  io  ceremonial  duties,  because  theae  laws  are 
P  Mmmanded ;  our  love  appears  in  the  other,  because  the  things    ^ 
I  flOcnmaDded  are  also  lovely  in  themselves.     The  image  of  GodiaV 
'  n  itself.  Bs  God  hiuuelf  is  good  in  himself.    Now,  the  moral  I 
n  exact  rule  of  nothing  else  but  God's  itni^c,  as  is  evident,  ' 
fy>  Si,  where  the  image  of  God  is  made  io  ponsist  in  holj- 
""  "  _^J  (,  the  lirat  table  being  the  rule  of  tlie  one, 

d  taUe  beiug  the  rule  of  the  other ;  and  hence  it  follows 
l<'aDd«ntably,  that  moral  laws,  respecting  only  God's  image,  have 
L'Xnpcel  oiOy  to  such  thiugs  as  are  good  in  themselres,  and  wheru- 
kin  w«  resemble  and  are  made  like  unto  ijod.     Some  things  (sailb 
TCuaeruu)  are  good  in  ihemselvea,  viz.,  such  things  wherein  God's 
Itauge  ahines  forth,  as  ho  is  holy,  just,  and  good.  (Col.  iii.  10. 
Kph>  \v.  24.)     Some  things  are  indlfierent,  neither  good  nor  bad 
'     '      iwlvtrs,  but  merely  as  commanded  or  forbidden,  Which  also 
it  God'a  image,  unless  it  be  tub  ratione  rnih,  hut  not  tnh 
toralU  ;  i.e.,  they  resemble  God  as  he  is  a  being,  but 
t  Is  holy,  just,  and  good  in  himself,  the  rule  of  which 
Dce  is  the  uoral  law,  which  therefore  commands  thin^ 

■  ^hpv  arf!  gnm^.  S.  _^ 

'ITittit  18.     God,  out  of  his  absolute  sovereignty,  could  have 

Budo  laws  biuiting  nil  (icrMins  in  alt  ages,  (and  in  this  respeet 

moral,)  without  having  any  more  goodness  in  them  than  mei-ely 

|_U*own  will;  but  it  is  hia  will  and  good  pleasure  to  make  all  laws 

e  moral  Io  be  fir«l  good  in  themselves  for  all  men,  before  j 
Cfce  will  impose  liicm  npun  all  men.     And  hence  it  is  a  weaknessj 
Efcr  any  la  affirm,  that  a  moral  law  is  not  such  a  law  which  is 
^■ben-fare  commanded  because  it  is  good,  because  (say  they)  it  is 
■JWt  the  goodocM  of  the  thing,  but  the  sovereign  will  of  God, 
f irliich  makes  nil  things  good ;  for  it  is  the  sovereign  will  of  Goil 
1  proved)  to  make  every  moral  law  good,  and  therefore  to  I 
ind  it,  ralher  than  to  make  it  good  by  a  mere  command- 
Tkttit  19.     The  will  of  God  is  indeed  ilie  rule  of  all  good- 
>,  and  conM'iiuetitly  of  All  moral  laws  j  but  we  know  there  ifl 
roAM  tUereCi  and  volanliu  numdati,  the  first  of  which  is,  viz., 
D  wQl  of  Gud's  decree,  (as  it  appears  in  the  execution  of  it,) 
a  m  tiling  to  be  ({ood,  whether  it  be   creature  or  law;  (he 



formable  u 

second  ol'  these,  viz.,  tLe  will  of  Gad's  comnmnd,  enjoins  the 
practice  of  such  a  iliitj,  the  rule  and  law  to  guide  which  is  first 
made  good  (if  il  be  a  moral  law)  bj  Ibe  wisdom  and  power  o 
the  will  of  God's  decree ;  bo  that  the  will  of  Giod  appearing  in 
both  these  (viz.,  Grod's  decreeing  and  commanding  will)  is  the 
complete  rule  of  every  moral  law  ;  so  that  as  no  law  is  morallj' 
good  merely  because  it  is  comroanded,  so  neither  is  it  thus  good 
rWless  also  it  bo  commanded.  God's  will  in  all  moral  laws  is 
■  KtM  to  maiie  Ihem  good,  and  then  to  command  them,  when 
they  nt-e  thus  far  made  good  ;  both  which  together  make  up  a 
[moral  lawi^ 

TRem  20.  Il  is  true  that  sin  13  fe^transgression^jSod'a  law. 
There  is  noiliing,  thererorc^sinfiil  biitit  is  ilie'  ffsiTsgression  of 
ind  hence  there  is  no  obedience  good  but  what  is  con- 
to  some  law.  But  we  must  know  that  as  transgres- 
Bion  01  auy  law  doth  not  nxake  a  tlung  morally  sinful,  (for  then 
la  break  a  ceremonial  law  would  be  a  moral  siii,)  so  also  obedi- 
ence to  every  law  doth  not  make  a  duly  morally  lawful  and 
good,  (for  then  obedience  to  a  ceremonial  law  must  be  a  moral 
obedience.)  Moral  transgression,  therefore,  is  a  breach  of  such 
a  law  which  forbids  a  thing  because  it  is  evil,  as  moral  obedi- 
cQfe  is  our  conformity  to  such  a  law  which  -commands  a  thing 
'  txjcuuse  it  is  good  J  nut  that  any  thing  is  morally  evil  in  itself  be- 
fore it  be  forbidden,  for  then  there  should  be  a  moral  sin  before,  and 
without  any  law  to  forbid  it,  which  ia  most  absurd;  but  because 
a  thing  is  evil  in  itaelt,  and  is  therefore  forbidden,  it  is  there- 
fore morally  evil,  God  may  and  doth  make  it  fundamentally 
-evil  before  it  be  forbidden,  but  it  is  not  morally  evil  until  il  be 
forbidden./  The  like  may  be  said  concerning  moral  obedience 
according  to  any  moral  law.  No  man  should  tiierefore  think  that 
this  description  given  of  a  moral  law  should  give  occasion  to  any  to 
imagine  that  some  things  are  morally  good  or  evil,  before  any 
law  pass  upon  tliem,  and  that  therefore  there  are  some  duties, 
and  some  sins,  which  are  so  without,  and  belbre,  any  law  of  God. 
For  we  see  that  things  good  in  ihemselves  must  be  commanded, 
else  they  are  not  moral  duties ;  yet  witlial  they  are  therefore  com- 
manded, because  they  are  good  in  themselves.  It  is  true  tliul, 
by  the  verdict  of  some  of  ilie  schoolmen,  some  duties  are  iiiur- 
ally  good  before  any  law  commands  them,  (as  to  love  and  mag- 
nify God,)  and  that  some  sins  (as  to  curse  and  blimphetne 
God)  are  moFally  evil,  before  any  law  forbids  them  ;  but  (10 
omit  other  answers)  if  such  sipppositious  may  be  rationally  made, 
.  (which  some  deny,)  yet  ii  may  bo  upon  good  grounds  denied  that 
any  duty  can  be  mondly  good,  or  any  sin  morally  ovil,  until 


■lui*  piui  apon  them  either  to  comnianil  or  forbid  ihe  same.     It 

\it  luilocil  suitable  and  meet  in  nnlure  for  man  to  love  God,  and 

Bsuiiable  and  unmeet  to  bladpbeme  and  hute  God ;  but  suelk 

nitablenees  or  UDSuilableiieiis,  as  lliey  make  things  fundament- 

dljr  good  or  evil,  so  tbey  CAa  not  make  any  thing  morally  good 

ir  evil,    nnlesa  we  suppose    »om«  law ;    for  it   would  be,   ia 

Vlhlii  (^ase,  with  man  as  it  is  in  brute  creatures,  who  do  man^ 

Vlliinga  unnatural,  (as  to  eat  up  and  destroy  their  own  young.)  . 

which  yet  are  not  morally  sinful,  beuiuse  they  are  not  under  any  * 

r  BwnJ  law  ;  and  one  of  the  most  ancient  and  best  of  the  schoolmen, 

I  Ibough  he  thinks  that  the  obserrance   of  the  Sabbath   before 

I  Moms'  time  was  not  ieeundiim  ra/ionem  prtecepti,  or  rlebite  jieri,- 

I  i.e.,  was  not  actually  commanded,  yet  that  it  was  lecundam  ratio- 

I  iMm  htmetti,  hoe  ett  dignejitri  ;  ■'.  e.,  it  was  congnioue,  and  a  thing 

eet  and  wonhy  to  be  observed,  even  from  the  first  creation.    But 

I  vUl  wfiV  of  our  adversaries  hence  say,  that  because  it  was  meet 

^^Mid  worthy  to  be  observed,  that  therefore  it  was  a  moral  law  from 

ktte  bcgiantng  of  the  world,  while  it  had  uo  command  (as  is 

1W  them  supposed)  to  be  observed?     For   it  must  be   Bome- 

I  ttitig  meet  &ud  congruous,  and  worthy  to  be  observed  of  man, 

I  which,  when  it  is  commanded,  makes  it  to  be  a  moral  law ;  for 

I  then  the  law  commands  a  tiling  that  is  good,  and  because  it  ia 

k  Mod  it  is  therefore  commanded  ;  which  goodness  we  must  a-lit- 

I  Ue  more  nanowly  now  iuquire  into. 

TWm  21.  If  it  be  demanded  therefore.  What  is  that  good- 
k.Ml  tt  moral  law  for  which  it  b  therefore  commanded?  the 
R  is  gi\*en  by  Vosques,  Suarez,  Smisingn,  and  most  of 
KilmEOj  and  sundry  of  oar  own  writers,  that  it  is  nothing 
t  Ihal  ramely  suitableness  and  meelness  in  the  thing 
Uided  unto  human  outure  as  rational,  or  unto  man  as  ra- 
KitiooBl,  and  consequently  unto  every  man.  When  I  say  as  rational, 
f  I  nndcrstand  as  Master  Irotisidc  doth,  viz.,  a&right  reason,  nci- 
t  blinded  nor  corrupted,  doth  require.  When  I  say  as  suit- 
I,  and  consequently  to  every  man,  I  hereby  exclude  . 
1  aerely judicial  and  evangelical  from  being  moral:  the 
'"*  *  '  e  guiiAblc  to  some  men  only  ;  the  other  are  not 
men  as  men,  but  to  man  as  corrupt  and  fallen, 
i  tberafore  bind  not  all  men,  but  only  those  among  whom 
vfliey  are  sulficiently  and  actually  promulgated,  as  is  evideni. 
f  (ttoia.  X.  14.  John  xv.  22.)  But  moral  laws  are  suitable  to  all 
fclBcn,  and  have  an  inward  meelness  and  congruiiy  to  bo  observed 
{•f  all  men.  For  look,  as  when  the  Lord  gives  laws  to  any  par- 
r-halion,  whether  immediately  by  himself,  or  mediately  by 
I,  h*  ever  makes  them  suitable  to  the  people's  peace  and  good 





of  tliat  natiou  ;  bo  when  he  makes  laws  binding  all  mankmd  in 

s,  he  makes  them  auilahle  lo  hut 
kind  therein.  And  look,  as  Dnlional  lawa  binii  not  merclj  by  ths 
mere  will  of  the  lawgiver,  but  frora  the  goodnesa  and  suitable- 
besB  in  the  thing  unto  their  comiaon  good,  so  here  moral 
laws,  which  concern  all  nations,  bind  not  merely  because  of  the 
will  of  God,  {whi(^h  of  itself  is  i-ulfieieut  to  bind  nil  men,  if  he 
had  pleased  to  put  no  more  in  moral  laws,)  but  nlao  because  of 
■  M>me  goodnesa  in  J  he  things  commanded,  which  in  nothing  else 
but  eucK  suitableness  as  is  mentioned  unto  the  common  good  of 
nun.  What  this  suitableness  lo  human  nature  is,  we  shall  show 
in  due  place ;  meanwhile,  I  do  not  understand,  by  snitnbleneBs  ta 
human  nature,  the  inchnation  of  human  nature  now  corrupted  b/ 
sin;  for  infused  and  supernatural  virtues  and  graces  (to  which 
therefore  human  nature  is  not  inclined)  are  (as  Vaaques  truly 
and  strongly  maintains)  in  some  sense  natural  and  good  in 
themselves,  not  because  human  nature  Is  inclined  to  them,  but 
because  they  are  very  congruons  and  consentaneous  thereunto, 
and  perfecting  human  nature,  as  such,  and  consequently  suitable 
thereunto.  A  good  is  said  lo  be  utile  el  deteclabi/t  in  respect  of 
some  prodt  or  delight  which  eomes  to  man  by  it ;  but  bonum  honei- 
turn  in  genere  mnrit  (as  Suorez  and  his  fellows  call  it)  ccn- 
sislB  in  a  kind  of  decency,  comeliness,  and  sweet  proportion  be- 
tween sach  an  act  and  such  a  nature  as  acta  by  right  reoFon ;  to 
which  nature  it  is  exceeding  comely  and  suitable,  whether  any 
profit  or  delight  cotne  thereby,  yea  or  no.  As  now  in  the  di- 
vine natutB  it  is  exceeding  beautiful  and  comely  for  it  (and  there-  , 
fore  good  in  itself)  to  he  bountiful  and  merciful,  and  to  do  good 
unto  the  creature,  although  no  profit  could  come  lo  him  thereby. 
It  is  God's  nature,  as  I  may  so  say,  so  lo  do  :  so  it  is  in  human 
nature  ;  it  is  a  comely  thing  to  honor  parents,  reverence  God's 
name,  to  be  loving  and  merciful  lo  all  men,  ta  heart,  word,  aud 
deed  ;  to  give  God  a  fit  and  the  most  meet  proportion  of  time 
for  solemn  service  of  him,  who  allows  us  many  days  to  serve 
our  own  good  :  tbifi  is  good  nature,  and  being  thus  seemly  and 
suitable  to  it,  this,  and  such  like  tilings,  are  therefore  good  in 
_themselve3,  though  perhaps  neither  profit  nor  pleasure  should 
rSome  nnio  man  hereby.  And  hence^t  is  well  observed  by  some 
of  the  schoolmen,  that  right  reason  ilolli  not  make  a  thing  mur- 
al, but  only  judgelh  and  discerneth  what  is  moral ;  for  right  rea- 
son doth  not  make  a  thing  suitable,  but  only  seeih  whether  it  be 
|bo  or  no  ;  a  thing  may  he  suitable  before  right  reason  see  it,  yel 
'when  it  is  presented  to  reason,  it  sees  it  suitable,  &i  the  wall  is 
white  before  the  eye  see  it,  yet  when  the  eye  doth  sec  it,  il 

appears  nhitc  alM.     It  may  be  a 
Gml  a  serenih  part  of  our  time,  though 
I   itself  find  out  such  a  meet  proportion  ;  yet  when  reason  sees  it,  i«  forced  to  acknowledge  a  pomeliDees  of  eiguil}-,  nnd  suitable- 
I  aesa  therein,  as  shall  hcrcatier  nppear.^^^  ^^^^s^ 

'  "     7%esit  22.     But  here  let  it  be  ob^rveJ,  that   allBough   all 
moral  laws  are  thus  suilable  to  man's  nature,  yet  they  are  not 
all  alike  suitable  thereunto,  and  consequentl}'  not  equally  good 
in  ihenuelves ;    for  some   laws    are  more  immediately  suitable 
And  good,  others  mediately.     And  as  Wallceua  well  observes,  out 
of  Scotus,  that  there  is  a  double  morality :  "  The  first  is  ii«  lege  . 
L  Datura    tlricte    tumpla,    i.  e.,   such    laws  as  are  so  deeply  en-  | 
I  graven  upon  nature  as  that  these  principles  can  not  be  blotted  | 
I  ou  but  by  abolishing  of  nature;    the  second   is  de  lege  naiu- 
Lf*f  l"'' tuntpla  ;  and  these  laws  do  much  depend  upon  the  will 
M*tS  the  Lawgiver,  but  yet  they  are  very  congruous  and  suita- 
l-JHo  to  liuman  nature,  even    from  the  light  of"  those  principles 
Pit  nature."     And  hence  I  suppose  it  will  follow,  that /the  law  1 
pfer  a  seventh  part  of  time  to   be  dedicated  to  God,  may  welt 
I'lie  a  aoral  law,  although    it  depends  much    upon  the  will  of 
I'lhv  Lawgiver,  and  is   not  so  immediately  written  upon  man's 
I  lieart,    nor    so    equally  suitable    to    human  nature,  as  the  law  . 
I  tif  love    and    thankfulness    to  God    our  Creator   is.     For  (as  I 
I.Cameruu  well  observes)  that   some  things  which  are  good'Bf"^ 
I  Ihemselves  have    more    of  Grod's    image   stamped  upon    them, 
ft«oine  bare  lesd  of  it  i  and    hence  it  is,  that  though  all  moral 
f  fatws  arc  good  In  themselves,  yet  not  equally  so:  there  is  more 
l>  inuuttiibleneM  to  bate  and  curse  God  tlian  to  lust  alter  another 
W  nan's  house  or  servant ;  and  yet  both  are  evil  in  themselves, 
R«nd  breaches  of  moral  rules. 
K      Thrtit  23.     Hence,  therefore,  it  follows,  that  bocanse  moral 

■  precepts  are  of  such  things  as  are  good  in  themselves,  they  are 
Klberefore  pc-rpelunl  and  unchangeable,  and  because  they  are  in    - 

■  this  respect  good  in  themeelvcd.  to  wit,  because  they  are  suitable 
haiHl  cumely  to  man's  nature  as  rational,  hence  also  they  are 
vmivcraol :  ao  that  perpetuity  and  universality  seem  to  be  the 
Kiiii«panil>le  adjuncts,  rather  than  the  essence  of  a  moral  law : 
B^KI  when  Uiey  are  called  iKrpelual  and  uncbangeable,  we  must 
MudersUnd  them  in  respect  of  Go<l's  ordinary  disiHsnsation ;  for 
■b*  w^  it  the  groat  Lawgiver  may,  and  doth  sometimes  extraor- 
H4inarily  dis^M-nsc  with  moral  laws.  Abnihnm  might  have  killed 
W^M  aon  by  irxtrHordinnry  dis|ivnaaiion :  Adam's  sons  and  dnugh- 
Bcn  did  Biarnr  one  another  by  special  commission,  which  now  to 
HO  ordinarily  would  be  inoMtuous,  and  consequently  against  ft 



moral  law,  as  is  evidenl.  (Lev.  xviii.)  Only  let  it  be  here  re- 
meiabered,  that  when  1  coll  moral  kwa  perpeluiil  and  uniTersal, 
that  I  spenli  of  such  lawe  as  are  primarilj  moral,  which  do  first' 
ij  and  originally  suit  wilh  human  nature ;  for  laws  as  are  at 
secoud  band  moral,  and  as  it  were  accidentally  so,  may  be  change- 
able, as  hereafter  shall  appear. 

T^esit  34.  How  these  things  may  evince  the  morahty  of  a 
seventh  part  of  lime  will  be  difficult  to  conceive,  unless  farther 
inquiry  be  made  j  to  wil,  when  and  by  what  rules  may  it  be 
known  that  any  law  is  suitable  and  agreeable  unto  human  nature, 
and  consequently  good  in  ilsejf?  For  resolation  of  wluch  doubt, 
there  is  great  silence  generally  in  most  writers  :  Bishop  White 
endeavors  it  by  giving  three  rules  to  clear  up  this  mist ;  but  (pace 
tanli  tfiri)  I  much  fear  that  be  much  diirkens  and  obscures  the 
truth  herein,  and  muds  the  streams.  For,  1.  Because  the  Sab- 
iiutli  is  not  simply  moral,  but  hath  something  positive  in  it,  he 
therefore  makes  it  lemjiorary,  as  appears  in  his  conclusion  of  that 
discourse  ;  whenas  it  is  evident,  by  his  own  confession,  that  some 
laws  positively  moral  are  general  and  universal.  "  For  laws 
positively  moral  (he  aaith)  are  either  personal  only,  as  was  Abra- 
ham's coming  out  of  his  own  country.  (Gen.  xii.  1.)  Some  are 
for  one  nation  or  republic  only,  (Ex.  xxii.  1,  3,  7.)  Some  are 
commoD  and  general  for  all  mankind,  as  the  law  of  polygamy." 
2.  He  seems  to  make  laws  simply  and  entirely  moral  to  be  such 
ns  are  in  their  inward  nature  morally  good,  before  and  without 
any  external  imposition  of  the  Lawgiver.  Now,  if  by  external 
imposition  he  means  the  external  manner  of  Mosaical  administra- 
tion of  the  l^w,  there  is  then  aorae  truth  in  what  he  affirms  i  for 
doubtless  before  Moaea'  time  the  patriarchs  had  the  law  revealed 
atYer  anotlior  manner ;  but  if  by  external  imposition  be  meant 
external  revelation,  whether  immediately  by  God  himself  unto 
man's  conscience,  or  mediately  by  man.  then  it  is  most  false  that 
any  thing  can  be  morally  good  or  evil,  much  less  entirely  and 
simply  ao,  befoi'e  and  without  some  such  law ;  for  though  it 
may  be  good  and  suitable  to  man  before  a  law  pass  upon  it, 
yet  nothing  can  be  morally  good  or  evilwilliouL_somo^  taw, 
for  then  there  should  be  some  sin  whicKTanot  the  transgres- 
eioD  of  a  law,  and  some  obedience  which  is  not  directed  by  any 
law,  both  which  are  impossible  and  abominable.  3.  "  He  makes 
moral  laws  by  external  imposition  and  constitution  only  .to  be 
,  such  as,  before  the  external  imposition  of  them,  are  adiaphorous, 
and  good  or  evil  only  by  reason  of  some  circumstance."  When-  I 
as  we  know  thai  gome  such  laws  as  are  most  entirely  moral,  yet 
in  respect  of  their  inward  nature  generally  considered,  they  are    ■ 


THE   BOR\Lirv    OK   THE   SABBATU.  37 

iiidifl'ereiit  aL«o ;  fur  not  to  kill  and  take  away  man's  life  is  a 
moral  Iaw  entirely  so.  yet,  in  the  general  nalure  of  it,  it  is  indif- 
ferent, »Qd  by  cirt;utu«lanc«  may  become  eitlier  lawful  or  un- 
lawful ;  lawful  in  case  of  war  or  public  execution  of  justice ; 
unlawful  out  of  a  private  spirit  aud  per^nal  revenge.  In  one 
word,  the  whole  drill  of  bis  discoitrsc  hc'reia  in  to  show  that 
the  Sabbath  is  not  moral ;  and  this  he  woulil  prove  because  the 
tnbbath  is  ooi  simply  nniTentii-ely  moral,  ^which  ia  a  most  feeble 
•nd  weak  consequence;)  and  this  he  proves  "because  the  Sab* 
balh  day  hath  (in  respect  of  its  inward  nature)  no  more  holiness 
and  goodness  thiin  any  other  day,  all  the  days  of  the  week  bein^ 
«<|aaUy  good  by  creation."  But  he  niighl  well  know  that  the 
day  is  not  the  law  of  the  fourth  commandment,  but  the  keep- 
ing holy  uf  the  Sabbath  day,  which  is  a  Iliijig  inwardly  good, 
•nd  entirely  moral,  if  we  speak  of  some  day.  Nay,  (saith  the  . 
bifhop,)  the  law  of  nalure  leachetb  that  some  sufficient  and  con- 
Tcaient  time  be  set  apart  fur  God's  worship ;  if,  therefore,  some 
day  be  moral,  although  all  days  by  creation  be  indlfiferent  and 
equal,  aorarding  to  bis  own  confession,  what  then  should  hinder 
fhe  juata  pan,  or  the  seventh  part  of  time,  from  being  moral  ? 
Will  he  say  because  all  days  are  etiually  holy  and  good  by  crea- 
ti«n  ?  Then  why  should  he  grant  auy  day  at  all  to  be  entirely 
moral  in  respect  of  a  sufficient  and  convenient  time  to  be  set 
■part  for  God  ?  If  he  saith  the  will  and  iiapusilioD  of  the 
Lawgiver  abolisbeth  its  morality,  because  he  binds  to  a  seventh 
pan  of  lime,  then  we  shall  show  that  this  is  most  false  and  fee- 
ble in  the  sequel. 

nwt  25.  There  are,  therefore,  four  rules  to  guide  our 
judgments  aright  herein,  whereby  we  may  know  when  a  law  ia 
•uilable  and  agreeable  to  human  nalure,  and  consequently  good 
in  itnelf ;  which  will  be  sufficient  to  clear  op  the  law  of  the  Sab- 
bath to  be  truly  moral,  (whether  in  a  higher  or  lower  degree  of 
morality  it  makes  no  matter,)  and  that  it  is  not  a  law  merely 
icmpomry  and  ceremonial. 

1.  Sudi  Inws  as  necessarily  flow  from  natural  relation,  both 
between  Gi>d  and  man,  as  well  as  between  man  and  man: 
IhoBB  ar«  fcaod  in  themselves,  because  suitable  and  congruous 
hi  human  nature  ;  for  there  is  a  decency  and  sweet  comeliness 
In  Bitnnd  to  those  rules  to  which  our  relations  bind  vs.  For 
Imm  litis  ground  the  prophet  Muiochi  ualls  fur  feur  and  honor 
of  God  us  monil  duties,  be<'ause  lliey  are  tio  comely  and  seemly 

I  for  n^  in  respect  uT  tlie  relation  belwi 

If  I  be  your  Lord, 

I  and  Master,  and  Father,  where  is  my  fear?  where  is  my  honor? 

[(klal.  i.  e.)     I^vc  alsobetwi 

I  and  wife  is  pressed  aa  m  < 

38  TUE  iionALiTi  ov  Tilt:  sABiiArn. 

comely  duty  by  the  apostle,  from  tbat  near  relation  beliceen 
them,  being  made  "oue  flesh."  (Eph.  v.  28,  29.)  There  are 
Bcarce  any  who  question  the  moi^ityof  tlie  duties  of  the  second 
table,  because  they  are  so  evidenlly  comely,  suitable,  and  Agree- 
able to  human  nature,  coneidered  relatively,  as  man  stands  in 
relation  to  those  who  are  or  should  be  unto  him  as  hia  own  flesh  ; 
and  therefore  he  is  to  honor  superiors,  and  therefore  must  not 
kill,  nor  steal,  nor  lie,  nor  covet,  nor  defile  the  flesh,  etc. ;  but  the 
morality  of  all  llie  rules  of  the  liriit  table  is  not  seen  so  evident- 
ly, because  the  relation  between  God  and  man,  wliieh  makes 
them  comely  and  suitable  to  man,  is  not  so  well  considered;  for 
if  tb&re  be  a  God,  and  this  God  be  our  God,  according  to  the 
first  commandment,  then  it  is  Tcry  comely  and  meet  for  man  to 
honor,  love,  fear  him,  delight,  trust  in  him,  etc ;  and  if  this  God 
mustbeworshipedof  man  in  respect  of  the  mutual  relation  between 
them,  then  it  is  comely  and  meet  to  worship  him  with  his  own 
worship,  according  to  the  second  commandment,  and  lo  worship 
him  with  nil  holy  reverence,  according  to  liie  third  command- 
ment ;  and  if  lie  must  be  thus  worshiped,  and  yet  at  all  times 
(in  respect  of  our  necessary  worldly  employments)  can  not  be  so 
solemnly  honored  an^AorshJped  as  is  tomely  and  meet  for  so 
great  a  Gad,  then  it  la  very  fit  and  comely  for  all  men  to  have 
some  set  and  stated  time  of  worship,  according  to  some  fit  pro- 
portion, which  the  Lord  of  time  only  can  best  make ;  and  there- 
fore a  seventh  part  of  time  which  he  doth  make,  according  to 
the  fourth  commandment. 

*  2.  Such  laws  as  are  drawn  from  tlie  imilable  attributes  and 
works  of  God  arc  congruous  and  suitable  to  man's  Datum ;  for 
tfEat  greater  comeliness  con  there  be,  or  what  can  be  more  suit- 
able to  that  nature  which  is  immediately  made  for  God,  than  to 
be  like  unto  God,  and  to  attend  unto  those  rules  which  guide  there- 
unto  P  Hence  to  be  merciful  (o  men  in  misery,  to  forgive  our 
enemies  and  thode  tbat  do  us  wrong,  to  be  bountiful  to  those  that 
be  in  want,  to  be  patient  when  we  suffer  evil,  are  all  moral  du- 
ties, because  they  are  comely  and  suitable  lo  man,  and  Uiat  be- 
□ause  herein  he  resembles  and  is  made  like  unto  God.  Hence 
to  labor  six  days  and  rest  a  seventh  is  a  moral  because  a 
comely  and  suitable  duly,  and  that  because  herein  man  follows 
the  example  of  God,  and  becomes  most  like  unto  him.  And 
hence  it  is  that  a  seventh  year  of  rest  can  not  be  urged  upon 
man  to  be  as  much  moral  as  a  seventh  day  of  rest,  because  man 
hath  God's  example  and  pattern  in  resting  a  seventh  day,  but 
not  in  resting  any  seventh  year ;  God  never  made  himself  an 
example  of  any  ceremonial  duty,  it  being  unsuitable  to  his  glori- 

TllK   -linilALITV    OF   Jt\K    SAHBATn.  39 

reU>;nrj  tn  lo  do,  but  onlj  of  moral  and  Bpinliial  holinesa  ;  | 
d  idfivfore  ihere  is  $omewliiiI  ebe  ii)  a  seventh  dny  that  is  not/ 
a  wvenlh  year;  and  it  is  utterly  false  to  think  (as  some  do)/ 
It  tliere  is  as  mucli  equity  for  the  oliservaliun  of  the  one 
I  there  is  of  the  other.  "  And  here,  by  the  way.  may  he 
ttn  a  gross  mislake  of  Mr.  Primruse.  who  would  make  God'ii 
■  «xun|ile  herein  not  to  be  morally  imitabic  of  us,  nor  man 
necessarily  bound  thereunto,  it  being  not  naturally,  and  in  re- 
fpect  of  itself,  imitxblc,  but  only  because  it  pleaseth  God  to  com-* 
nand  man  so  to  do  ;  as  also  because  this  action  of  God  did  not 
flow  from  Buch  attributes  of  God  as  are  in  their  nature  imitable, 
••  mercy,  bounty,  etc.,  but  from  one  of  those  attributes  as  is  not 
imitable.  and  which  we  ought  not  to  imitate,  viz.,  hid  omnipo- 
ICDcy.  But  suppose  it  did  How  from  his  omnipotently,  and  that 
we  otif^t  tiot  to  imitat«  his  omni{ioiency,  and  that  we,  who  are 
weakneas  iuelf,  can  not  imitate  omnipotent  actions,  yet  it  is  obvious 
lo  common  sense,  that  such  acts  which  arise  from  such  attribules 
aa  nui  not  be  imitated  of  us,  in  respect  of  the  particular  effects 
which  are  produced  hy  them,  yet  in  the  actings  of  such  attributes 
lb«re  may  be  something  morally  good  which  is  imitable  of  us  ; 
as,  for  example,  though  we  arc  not  to  imitate  God  in  his  mirae- 
ntoua  works,  (as  in  the  burning  of  Sodom,  and  such  like,) 
jH  there  may  be  that  justice  and  wisdom  of  God  shining  therein 
which  we  ooght  to  imitate ;  for  we  ought  lo  see,  before  we  cen- 
■uro  and  condemn,  as  God  did  in  proceeding  against  Sodom. 
So  it  is  Id  this  exlraonlinary  work  of  making  the  world,  where- 
in, ahhaugh  we  are  not  to  go  about  to  tnake  another  world  with- 
in that  timei,  as  God  did,  yel  therein  the  labor  and  re.«t  of  God 
«u  teen,  which  is  imitable  of  man ;  which  labor  and  rest,  as 
tb«y  are  moral  duties,  so  they  are  confirmed  by  a  moral  exam- 
fir,  and  therefore  most  seemly  and  comely  for  man  to  imitate 
froRi  such  an  rxample;  and  whereas  he  afiirms  that  this  example 
was  not  moral.  U^cause  it  was  not  in  itself  imitable,  being  grounded 
duly  upon  God's  free  will."  The  reason  is  weak :  for  to  labor  in 
ne'a  calling  is.  without  controversy,  a  moral  duty,  (as  idleness  is  a 
BOral  sisi)  yet  if  one  would  ask  why  man  is  to  labor  here,  and 
■M  rather  lo  lead  a  contemplative  life  in  the  vision  and  fruition 
of  (tod  immediately,  I  suppose  no  reason  can  be  given  but 
the  good  pleasiire  of  God,  who,  in  his  deep  wisdom,  saw  it  most 
meet  for  man  to  s|iend  some  proportionable  time  in  labor  fur  him- 
■elf,  and  some  in  reHi  for  God :  whereunlo  he  gave  man  such 
an  eminent  example  from  the  t>eginning  of  the  world.  Master 
PrinronG  can  not  deny  but  that  a  convenient  time  for  lalMtr  anil 
mt,  in  general,  is  moral.  "  But,"  saith,  lie,  "  if  God  had  not  dc' 
dnrvd  lus  will  by  a  eonunandraent  particularly  to  labor  six  days, 



nndrest  tlw  eevenlb,  iheJews  would  nol  have  liionsht  llicinsplr«i 
bound  to  Ihii  observBiioii  from  God's  example  only  :  wbieh  showi 
that  there  ig  do  moraliljr  in  it  to  bind  (lie  cunscivncu  forever." 
But  it  maj  be  ns  troll  doubted  whether  acts  of  liounlj  and  mer- 
ey  (to  which  he  thinks  we  are  bound  merely  from  God's  ex- 
ample) in  respei^t  of  the  parliculiu'  applicaliou  of  ihnte  acts  to 
enemies  of  God  and  of  onrselve*,  as  weli  as  lo  friends,  be  o*' 
binding  virtue  merely  by  God's  example,  miless  we  had  n  com- 
mandment thoreunto  yfor  in  moml  precepts,  as  the  thing  is  com- 
manded becanse  it  is  good,  so  it  is  not  morally  pxid  nnless  it  be 
commanded :  but  suppose  that  God'a  example  of  labor  six  days, 
itnd  rest  ihe  seventh,  should  not  have  been  binding  as  other  ex- 
amples, unless  there  had  been  a  commandment  for  so  doing ;  yet 
this  is  no  argument  that  this  example  is  not  moral  at  all,  but  only 
that  it  is  not  so  equally  moral,  and  known  to  be  so,  as  some  other 
duties  bo  ;  for  man  may  spend  too  much  time  in  labor,  and  givs 
'  God  loo  short  or  too  little  time  for  rest.  If,  therefore,  he  wants  the 
light  of  a  commandment  or  rule  to  direct  and  guide  him  to  the 
dttesi  and  roost  meet  proportion  of  lime  for  both,  is  be  not  apt 
hereby  to  break  the  rule  of  morality,  which  consists  (as  hath 
been  showu)  in  that  wbii?h  is  most  suitable,  comely,  and  conven- 
ient for  man  lo  give  to  Goil  or  Toan  ?  The  commandment,  there- 
fore, in  this  case,  measuring  out  mid  declaring  such  a  proportion, 
and  wliat  time  is  most  convenient  and  comely  for  man  to  tnktt 
-to  himself  for  labor,  or  to  give  lo  God  for  rest,  it  doth  not  abolish 
the  morality  of  the  example,  but  doth  rather  establish  and  make 
it>  It  sets  out  [he  most  comely  and  meet  proportion  of  time  for 
labor  and  rest,  and  therefore  such  a  time  as  is  most  good  in  itself, 
because  most  comely  and  proportionable,  which,  being  therefore 
commanded,  is  a  moral  duty  in  man,  and  tbe  example  hereof 
morally  binding  in  God. 

3.  Such  taws,  which  man's  reason  may  sec,  either  by  innate 
light  or  by  any  other  external  help  and  light,  to  be  just,  and  good, 
and  Bt  for  mnn  to  observe,  such  laws  are  congruous  and  suitable  to 
human  nature.  I  say  by  any  external  help,  as  well  as  by  innate 
light;  for  neither  internal  nor  external  light  makes  a  thing  just 
and  suitable  lo  man,  no  more  than  the  light  of  the  sun,  or  the 
light  of  a  lantern,  makes  the  king's  highway  to  the  eiiy ;  but 
they  only  declare  and  manilost  the  way,  or  that  which  was  so  iu 
itself  before.  Hence  it  comes  to  pass,  that  although  man's  rea- 
son can  nut  see  ihe  eqnity  of  some  laws,  aitfecedenter,  by  innate 
light,  before  it  be  illuminated  by  some  external  light,  yet  if  by 
this  external  light  the  mind  sees  the  equity,  justice,  and  holiness 
of  such  a  law,  this  may  autficiently  argue  the  morality  of  such  a 
'        which  was  just  and  good,  before  any  light  dUcoverod  it,  and 

THE    SABBATH.  41 

n  DOW  dUcorercd  onlj',  not  made  to  be  eo,  whelher  by  inlerDal  or 

external  light.     "  And  henl^c  Aquiiins  well  observes,  tbnt  moral 

bws    (which  he  nmkcs  to  be  such  as  are    congruous  lo  right 

Kngoo)  sometimeE  are  euch  as  not  only  command  such  things 

which  reason  doth  readily  see  to  be  comely  and  meet,  but  aUo 

socb  laws  about  which  miin'a  reaflon  may  readily  and  easily  err, 

P  flod  go  u&tray  from  that  which  is  comely  and  meet."     And  hence 

^Jt  is,  thnt  aUhough  no  reason  or  wit  of  mun  could  ever  have 

■'fcuod  out  the  most  just  And  equal  proportion  of  time,  or  what 

IproportioD  ift  mojit  comely  and  suitable,  or  that  a  seventh  part  of 

■  liaie  tboidd  have  been  universally  observed  as  holy  to  God,  yet 

■  tr  any  exi«rtial  li<;ht  and  teaching  from  above  shall  reveal  this 
B  tfmc,  and  the  equity  and  suitableness  of  it,  so  that  reason  shall 
liadtnowleUge  il  etjuul  and  good,  that  if  we  have  six  days  for  our- 

■  wives,  God  should  have  one  for  himself,  this  is  k  strong  argu- 
B-MODt  thai  such  a  command  is  moral,  because  reason,  thus  illami- 
■asicd,  cait  not  but  ackuowlcdge  it  most  meet  aod  equal ;  for  though 
■i>BKon  may  not,  by  any  natural  or  innate  light,  readily  see  thnt 
HfB^  a  dirisioa  of  lime  Is  most  suitable,  and  yet  may  readily  err 
■iml  misconeeive  the  most  suilabte  and  convenient  proportion  an<l 
■iE vision  of  time,  it  is  then  a  sufficient  proof  of  the  morality  of  such 
■-a  command,  if  the  congruily  and  equity  of  it  be  discerned  con- 
tmgufntfr  only,  (as  we  say,)  and  by  external  light.-' 

■  4.  Whatever  law  was  once  writ  upon  man's  heart  in  piire  na- 
■'tv«  ii  tiill  Kuilnhle,  and  congruouR,  and  convenient  to  human 
E  afttare,  and  consequently  good  in  itself  and  moral.  For  whnl- 
I  trvT  WB0  so  writ  u|)on  Adam's  heart  was  not  writ  there  as  ujioii  a 
U^ritaic  person,  but  as  a  common  nerson.  having  the  common  na- 

■  iisre  of  man,  and  tiumlTiig  in  the  room  of  all  mankind-  Hence, 
KM  DOtbing  was  writ  then  but  what  was  common  to  all  men,  so 
Ksoch  lhing»  thus  writ  were  good  for  all  men,  and  suitable  lo 
Mtll  men,  it  bring  most  injurious  to  God  to  think  that  any  thing 
Hcvil  sboulJ  be  iiDprinled  there.  If,  therefore,  it  be  proved 
nku  the  lnw  of  the  Sabbath  was  then  writ  upon  man's  heart, 
nben  it  undeniably  follows  that  it  is  meet  and  suitable  lo  all  men 
BmII  io  obtcrve  a  ISabbath  day ;  and  indeed  to  the  right  under- 
Bitooding  of  what  is  suitable  lo  man  as  man,  and  conaequenlly 
■toontl,  there  is  uotfaing  more  helpful  than  to  cunsidcr  of  our  prini- 
Hti*e  wtate,  and  what  was  suitable  to  our  nature  then  ;  for  if  that 
BAich  is  moral  in  marriage  is  to  be  searched  for  in  the  first  and 
HipHenI  records  of  our  first  creation  by  the  appointment  of  our 
nfevioar,  I  then  know  no  reason  (whaiever  others  object) 
uni  morality  in  all  other  laws  and  duties  is  there  to  be  sought 
KAm  ;  for  altbougb  our  original  perfection  is  now  defaced  ' 



lost,  and  in  ihat  respect  is  a  nieruin  non  eru,  (as  some 
call  it,)  yet  it  had  once  a  being,  and,  tlierelbre,  in  tliis  con- 
troversy, we  may  lawfully  inquire  afi«r  it,  consitlering  espe- 
cially iliat  this  being  which  oqco  it  had  may  be  eufiicienllj 
known  by  the  contrary  being  of  universal  corruption  iLat  is 
in  us  now,  oa  aha  by  the  light  of  the  Scriptures,  in  which 
the  Searcher  and  Maker  of  all  hearts  declares  it  unto  us  ;  and, 
indeed,  there  are  many  moral  duties  whieh  will  never  appear 
good  and  suitable  to  man,  but  rather  hard  and  unreasona- 
ble (because  impossible)  until  we  see  and  remember  from 
whence  we  are  fallen,  and  what  once  we  had, 

TAesis  26.  If,  therefore,  a  moral  law  eommand  that  which 
is  suiLiblo  to  huniHU  nature,  and  good  in  itself,  then  it  follows 
from  hencer-(wliidi  was  touched  before.)  that  divine  deleroilna- 
tion  of  something  in  a  law  dotit  not  always  take  away  moral- 
ity from  a  law  ;  for  divine  determination  is  many  times  no 
more  but  ft  plain  and  positive  declaration  of  that  whieh  is 
suitable,  just,  and  good,  and  equal  for  man  to  observe.  Xow, 
■hut  which  points  out  and  declares  unto  us  the  morality  of  a 
law  can  not  possibly  abolisli  and  destroy  such  a  law.  For  a 
moral  law  commanding  that  which  is  suitable  and  gooil,  (as 
liath  been  shown,)  it  is  impossible  that  the  commandment 
which  delerminelh  and  direcleih  to  lhat  which  is  good,  that 
by  thia  determination  it  should  overthrow  the  being  of  such 
a  good  law,  nay,  verily,  particular  determination  and  posi- 
liveuess  (as  some  call  it)  is  so  far  from  abolishing,  as  that  it 
mther  adds  to  the  being,  as  well  as  to  the  clearing  up  and 
maui  festal  ion,  of  such  a  law.  For  if  it  be  not  sulficient  to 
make  a  moral  law,  that  the  thing  be  good  in  itself,  but  that  also 
it  must  be  commanded,  tlien  the  commandment  which  many 
times  only  determints  to  that  which  good  (and  coneequently 
determination)  doih  add  unto  the  being  of  a  moral  law. 

Tyteii*  27.  There  is  scorce  any  thing  but  it  is  morally  indif- 
'ferent,  until  it  falls  under  some  divine  determination;  but  divine 
deiermioaiioo  is  twofold:  1.  Of  such  things  which  are  not  good, 
lil,  or  needi'ul  for  man  to  observe  without  a  command,  as  sacri- 
fices aiid  sacraments,  and  such  like  :  now  herein,  in  such  laws, 
positive  determination  may  be  very  well  mconsistent  with  moral- 
ity ;  and  it  may  be  safely  said,  that  such  a  law  is  not  moral,  but 
rather  positive  ;  and  thus  the  learned  sometimes  sfieok.  2.  Of 
such  tbmgs  as  are  equal,  good  in  themselves,  needful,  and  suita- 
ble for  man  ;  and  here  particular  determination  and  moruiiiy 
may  kiss  each  other,  and  arc  not  to  be  opposed  one  to  auother: 
and  hence  it  is,  that  if  God's  commandment  positive  determines 


TUII    UOKALITV    OF    TUF.    S^fiDATIT.  43 

e  any  part  of  insiitulcd  worahip,  (suppose  sacrBinents 
,)  yet  Burh  laws  ure  not  moral,  (flirhough  it  be  moral 
.  general  to  woi^hip  God  aflei*  bis  own  will,)  because  ihe  ihiugs 
'tbenuelve^  are  not  good  in  ihemselvea,  nor  needful :  but  if  God 
•hall  iletcriniDe  us  to  observe  a  Sabbatli  day,  this  delcrminaiioii 
dulh  Dot  lake  away  the  morality  of  the  command,  because  it 
being  good  in  ii£ijlf  to  give  God  the  meetest  and  fitti^t pni|y)riion 
of  time  for  holy  rest,  and  the  commandment  dtjclaring  that  thid 
Mvcnih  part,  or  so,  is  such  a  time,  henee  it  comes  to  pass,  that  i 
Ihta  time  ia  good  in  itself,  and  therefore  determination,  by  the  J 
oommandment  in  tills  case,  doth  not  abolish  the  morality  hereof.  I 
It  is  a  moral  duly  to  pay  iribate  to  CueHar,  to  give  to  Cuisar  that 
ubich  u  Creaar'i :  hence  because  a  man  may  give  loo  much  or 
too  little  to  him,  that  determioalion- which  directs  us  to  that  par- 
tKular  wliieh  is  Caesar's  due,  and  most  meet  for  him  to  receive 
and  us  to  give,  lliat  is  best  in  itself,  and  is  therefore  moral :  so 
prayer  b  a  moral  duty  ;  but  because  a  man  may  be  templed  lo 
pray  loo  oft  or  else  loo  seldom,  hence  detennination  of  the 
fittest,  and  this  finest  season,  makes  this  or  ihat  moral.  So  it  is 
here  in  the  Sabbath.  I  do  willingly  and  freely  profess  thus  far 
with  our  adversaries  of  the  morality  of  the  Sabbath  i  that  it  is  a 
moral  duty  to  give  God  some  time  and  day  of  holy  rest  and  wor- 
ship, as  it  is  moral  lo  give  CsiUir  his  due,  and  to  pray  to  God : 
Vit  b«tw.u$e  we  may  give  God  too  mimy  days  or  loo  few,  hence  ' 
iho  determination  of  the  most  meet  and  fittest  proportion  of  lime,  ' 
and  particularly  of  this  time,  makes  this  and  Ihat  to  be  also 
noTaL  if  no  day  at  all  in  general  was  good  and  lit  for  man  to 
give  to  God,  and  God  should,  notwithstanding,  command  a 
wtenth  day.  then  Ihe  commoudmcnt  of  such  a  day  with  such 
po^live  determination  could  not  be  moral  any  more  ihan  the 
determination  of  sacriJices  and  such  like.  But  every  day.  (say 
mnt^  of  our  adversaries,)  some  day,  (say  others  of  them,)  being 
•ckiMwIedged  lo  be  equal,  just,  and  good,  and  most  meet  to  give 
God.  bcnce  it  is  that  determination  of  a  seventh  day  dolh  not 
abolish,  but  clear  up,  that  which  is  raornl,  because  it  [Hiints  out 
onto  man  tliat  which  is  most  meet  and  equal,  lleuce,  therefore, 
it  follows  that  a  seventh  day  is  tlierelore  commanded,  because  it 
U  good,  and  not  good  merely  because  commanded.  Dciermino- 
tion,  also,  declaring  what  is  most  meet,  dcclareih  hereby  thai  this 
Commandmept  is  also  moral,  and  not  merely  positive  and  ceremo- 
nbl ;  which  not  being  well  considered  by  some,  this  fourth  com- 
(hnving  some  more  positiveness  aud  del eriiii nation 
diven  of  the  resij  hath  therefore  been  the  chief  btumbling 
I  wkI  rock  of  offense  to  many  against  the  morality  of  it|  by 



which  they  have  miserably  bi-uiscd  thprnselveii,  while  Ihey  havo 
,  endeavored  to  desli-oy  It,  upoii  so  gross  »  inii^iake^ 
-  •  TTietit  28.  It  is  true  ihut  God,  out  of  his  Hbsolute  sovereignty 
I  mid  good  (jleaaure  of  his  wilt,  might  have  deli.Tinine<I  ua  lo  ot* 
.serve  n  fourth,  a  iiioth,  a  twenlieili  part  of  our  lime  in  holy  rest, 
more  or  leas,  as  well  as  lo  a  seventh  j  yet  let  us  conaider  of  God 
ai  acting  by  counsel,  and  weigliing  and  cunsiderlng  with  himself 
what  is  most  meet  and  equal,  and  whal  proportion  of  time,  iii 
most  fit  for  himself;  arid  tlien  (with  leave  of  better  thoiightg, 
when  1  see  better  reason)  I  BupjtOBe  uo  man  can  prove  (unless 
be  be  made  privy  to  the  unknown  secrets  of  (be  wisdom  of  God) 
that  any  other  proportion  had  been  qs  meet  as  this  now  made 
by  the  actual  determination  of  God /there  was  not,  therefore, 
the  mere  and  sovereign  will  of  God  wbicli  thus  determined  of 
this  sevontit  part  of  time,  hut  also  ihc  wisdom  of  God,  which, 
considering  all  things,  saw  it  luoat  meet  and  suitable  for  man  lo 
give,  and  God  lo  receive  from  man,  and  therefore,  being  com- 
nntnded,  and  thus  particularly  determined,  becomes  moral. 

ThtiU  'i'i.  If  that  couimandmenc  be  moral  which  is  there- 
fore  commanded  because  it  is  good,  llien  hence  it  follows,  in  the 
second  place,  that  such  laws  only  are  not  moral  htws,  which  art) 
known  to  nil  men  by  the  light  of  corrupt  nature.  For.  as  halh 
been  already  said,  a  law  may  be  holy,  just,  good,  suitable,  and 
meet  for  nil  men  lo  observe,  whether  the  light  of  corrupt  nature, 
by  awakening  or  sleeping  principles,  (as  some  call  tbem,)  know  it 
or  no,  and  such  a  comeliness 
sufficient  to  make  it  moral.  'I 
in  Paul,  which  he  never  saw, 
of  corrupt  nature,  until  the 
efficacy  and  power,  (Kom.  vii. 
his  moral  laws  to  wliat  our 

of  themselves  to  see,  any  more  than  lo  what  our  i: 
ure  actually  able  to  do.  If  the  light  of  ukture  be  imperfect 
in  us  since  the  fall,  (which  no  wise  man  doubts  o(,)  then  there 
may  be  many  things  truly  moral,  which  the  light  of  nature 
now  sees  not,  Iwcause  it  is  imp«rt*ect,  which  in  its  perfection  it 
did  see;  and  this  consideration  ot' the  great  im|>erf(«tiuii  of  ilia 
light  of  nature  is  alone  sufficient  forever  lo  stop  thei: 
and  silence  their  hearts,  who  go  abuul  to  make  an  imperfect 
light  and  law  of  nature  the  perfect  rule  and  only  n 
moral  duties,  and  who  make  so  narrow  a  limitation  of  that 
which  is  mond  to  that  which  is  thus  imperfectly  natural, 
not  now  tex  nala,  but  lex  data,  whieb  is  the  rule  of  moral  du 
[  the  whole  Scriptures  contain  the  pert'ect  rule  of  all  moral  aul 

and  suitableness  ii 

ti  such  a  law  is 

here  were  many  si 

Buret  moral  sina 

nor  could  have  it 

■en  by  the  light 

law  fell    upon    hi 

m  wiih   miglity 

;)  for  God  is   not 

bound  to  crook 

corrupt  minds    ai 

re  aclually  able 


whether  man's  cormpted  and  imperfect  light  of  nature  see 
them  or  no.  It  is  a  common,  but 'a  most  perilous,  and  almost 
groundless  mistake  of  manj  in  this  controversy,  who,  when 
the  J  would  know  what  is  moral,  and  what  is  not  so,  of  such 
things  as  are  set  down  in  the  Scriptures,  thej  then  fly  to  the 
light  of  corrupt  nature,  making  it  to  be  the  supreme  judge  hereof, 
and  there  fall  to  examining  of  them,  whether  thej  are  seen  by 
the  light  of  nature  or  no,  which  is  no  less  follj  than  to  set  up 
a  corrupt  and  blind  judge  to  determine  and  declare  that  which 
M  moral,  to  make  the  perfect  rule  of  morality  in  Scripture  to  bow 
down  its  back  to  the  imperfection  and  weakness  of  nature,  to 
pull  out  the  sun  in  heaven  from  giving  light,  and  to  walk  by  the 
light  of  a  dim  candle,  and  a  stinking  snuff  in  the  socket  almost 
gone  out;  to  make  the  hornbook  of  natural  light  the  perfec- 
tion of  learning,  of  the  deepest  matters  in  moral  duties ;  to 
make  Aristotle's  ethics  as  complete  a  teacher  of  true  morality 
as  Adam's  heart  in  innocency;  and,  in  a  word,  to  make  man 
fallen,  and  in  a  manner  perfectly  corrupt  and  miserable,  to  be 
as  sufficiently  furnished  with  knowledge  of  moral  duties,  as 
man  standing,  when  he  was  perfectly  holy  and  happy.  Ima- 
gine, therefore,  that  the  light  of  nature  could  never  have  found 
out  one  day  in  seven  to  be  comely  and  most  meet  for  man 
to  give  unto  God ;  yet  if  such  a  proportion  of  time  be  most 
meet  for  man  to  give  to  God,  and  it  appears  so  to  be  when 
God  reveals  it,  it  may  and  should  then  be  accounted  a  moral 
law,  although  the  light  of  nature  left  in  all  men  could  never 
didcem  it.  The  schoolmen,  and  most  of  the  Popish  generation, 
not  considering  these  things,  (which,  notwithstanding,  are  some 
of  their  own  principles,)  have  digged  pits  for  themselves,  and 
made  snares  for  some  of  their  followers,  in  abolishing  the 
fourth  commandment  from  being  (in  the  true  sense  of  it) 
moral,  because  they  could  not  see  now  such  a  special  part 
of  time,  viz.,  a  seventh  part,  could  be  natural,  or  by  the 
light  of  corrupt  nature  discernible ;  which  things  so  discern* 
ible  they  sometimes  conclude  to  be  only  moral.  But  how  far 
the  light  of  corrupt  nature  may  discern  this  proportion  shall  be 
Fpoken  to  in  its  proper  place. 

Tke9i$  SO.  If,  lastly,  those  things  which  are  thus  commanded 
because  they  are  good  be  moral,  then  the  whole  decalogue  may 
hence  appear  to  be  the  moral  law  of  God,  because  there  is  no 
law  in  it,  which  is  therefore  good  only  because  it  is  commanded, 
but  is  therefore  commanded  because  it  is  good  and  suitable  to 
human  nature.  When  I  say,  suitable  to  human  nature,  I  do  not 
mean  human  nature  considered  absolutely,  but  relatively,  either 


in  relation  to  God,  or  relation  unto  man  :  for  not  only  the  light 
of  nature,  but  of  cotnmun  ttease  also,  bears  witness  tbat  every 
precppt  of  the  Beconil  lalile,  wherein  mnu  ta  considered  in  relii- 
lion  to  mitn,  is  thus  far  good ;  for  how  eoraely  and  good  is  it  to 
honor  pRrenIs,  to  be  tender  of  other  men's  lives  and  comforls,  to 
presene  one's  self  and  others  from  filthy  pol]llIion^:,  to  do  no 
wrong,  bat  all  the  good  we  can  to  other  men's  estates  1  etc.  Nor 
do  I  think  that  any  will  question  any  one  commandment  of  thia 
table  to  l>e  good  and  amiable  to  human  nature,  unless  it  be  some 
Nimrod  or  Brennus,  (that  professed  he  knew  no  greater  Jusiii'e 
than  for  the  elronger,  like  the  bigger  fishes  of  the  sea,  to  swallow 
up  the  lesser  in  case  they  be  hungry,)  or  some  Turkish  Tartar 
or  eannibnl,  or  some  surfeited  professor,  transformed  into  some 
licentious  opinionist,  and  so  grown  master  of  his  own  conscience, 
and  that  can  audaciously  outface  Ihe  ver)'  light  of  nature  and 

Qon  sense,  through  the  righteous  judgment  of  God  blinding 

lurdcning  his  heart.  And  if  the  commandments  of  the  second 
be  thus  far  good  in  themselves,  are  not  those  of  the  first 
table  much  more  ?  Is  love  to  man  (when  drawn  out  into  atl  the 
six  streams  of  the  second  table)  good  in  itself,  and  shall  not  love 
to  Go<l,  drawn  out  in  Ihe  four  precepts  of  the  first  table,  hs  the 
spring  from  whence  all  our  love  to  man  should  flow,  much  more  ? 
Are  Hie  streams  morally  sweet,  and  is  not  the  spring  itself  of  the 
same  nature?  I^ve  to  God  and  love  to  man  are  tlie  common 
principles  (saith  Aquinas  truly)  of  the  law  of  nature ;  and  all 
particular  precepts  (saith  he,  perhaps  unawares)  are  conclusiona 
flowing  from  these  principles,  out  of  Matt.  xxii.  And  are  th6 
principles  good  in  themselves  and  suitable  to  human  nature,  and 
do  not  all  Ihe  conclusions  participate  of  their  nature.  For  what 
are  all  particular  precepls  but  particular  unfoldings  of  love  to 
God  and  lore  to  man  ?  If  all  the  precepts  of  the  second  table 
be  moral,  which  do  only  coucern  man,  why  should  any  of  the 
first  fall  short  of  that  glory,  which  do  immediately  concern  God  ? 
Shall  man  have  six,  and  all  of  them  morally  good,  and  God  have 
but  four,  and  some  one  or  more  of  them  not  so  ?  Is  it  comely  and 
good  to  have  God  to  be  our  God  in  Ihe  first  commandment,  to 
worship  him  afler  bis  own  mind  in  the  second,  to  give  him  his 
worship  with  all  the  highest  respect  and  reverence  of  his  name  in 
the  third ;  and  is  it  not  as  comely,  good,  nnd  suitable  that  this 
great  God  and  King  should  have  some  munificent  day  of  state 
to  be  attended  on  by  his  poor  servants  and  creatures,  both  pub- 
licly nnd  privately,  with  special  respect  and  service,  as  oft  as 
himself  sees  meet,  and  which  wo  can  not  hut  see  and  confess  to 
be  moat  equal  and  just,  according  to  the  fourth  commandment? 

divided  into  labor  imd  rest,  is  il  not  equal 

uid  good,  if  we  have  six  dajs,  ihat  God  should  have  a  seventh  ? 

T  tbe  brute  beasts  could  speak,  thuy  would  buj  that  a  aevenlh 

.   a  good  for  them,    (Ex.  xxiii.  12;)    and  shall  man, 

>  balli  more  cause  and  more  need  of  real,  even  of  holy  rest, 

f  that  it  ia  not  good  for  faim  even  to  rest  in  tbe  bosom  of  God 

telf,  to  which  he  is  called  thb  daj?     Take  away  a  SabbathTI 

a  defend  us  from  atheism,  barbarism,  and  all  manner  of  I 

a  Mid  protaneness?    And  ia  it  evil  thus  to  want  it,  aiidj 

not  be  good  to  have  it  ?     I  confess,  if  Gud  had  com- 

1  a  perpetual  Subbaib,  it  bud  not  then  been  good,  but 

tie.  to  observe  any  set  Sabbalb ;  but  if  God  will  have  man  to 

r  for  himself  six  days,  and  this  labor  be  morally  good,  being 

*  commanded,  why  is  it  not  then  as  good  to  observe  a  seventh 

t  to  God,  being  also  commanded  of  him  ? 

rm  31.     It  is  therefore  at  least  an  indigested  assertion  of 

wbo  affinn  that  the  decalogue  sets  out  tbe  precepts  of  the 

'  of  nature,  and  yet  withal  doth  superadd  certain  precepts 

roper  to  tbe  Jewish  people;  in  which  last  respect  tbcy  suy  all 

I  bound  to  the  olnervance  thereof,  (and  they  produce 

!  fourth  cooimandment  fur  proof,)  but  in  respect  of  tbe  lirst 

But  although,  in  the  application  of  a  law,  something 

Y  be  pniper  to  the  Jewish   people,  yet  (with  leave  of  tbe 

med)  there  is  never  a  law  in  it  but  it  is  moral  and  common  to 

to  make  any  law  in  the  decalogue  proper  is  an  assertion 

g  from  a  false  and  blind  principle,  viz.,  that  that  law  only 

wliich  is  natural:  not  natural,as  suitable  to  human  nature, 

which  is  seen  and  known  by  the  common  light  of  corrupt 

re.  without  the  help  of  any  external  usher  or  teacher.     If 

3  any  laws  in  the  decalogue  be  proper,  how  will  any  Giid  out 

rem  moral  laws  which  concern  all,  from  proper  laws  which 

^risin  only  tusome?     Fur  if  God  huth  made  such  a  mingling, 

suveml  moral  laws  by  themselves,  then  man  hath  uo 

>vclBlion  by  any  distinct  and  severed  laws  left  unto  him, 

a  laws  proper  and  peculiar  from  laws  moral  and  com- 

Ni,  which  how  pernicious  it  may  be  to  dien's  souls  to  be  lell  to 

'  uncertainty,  as  also  how  injurious  to  God,  and  cross  to  lus 

)  eadi  in  discovering  moral  laws,  let  the  wise  consider ;  for 

y  uty  that  we  must  fly  for  help  herein  to  tbe  light  of  corrupt 

e,  then,  as  hath  been  shown,  an  imperfect  light,  and  a  blind 

Ic,  and  a  corrupt  judge  must  be  the  chief  rule  of  discerning 

tt  which  i*  moral  from  that  which  is  peculiar  and  pn)[>cr,  for 

wbltejM  such  a  kind  of  light  ii  tlie  light  of  corrupt  nature. 

:  7%tMii  SI.     Some  ttitnk  tlial  tliosu  comimmdmcnts  only  are 





48  TllK    MORALITY    DF   THE   SABBATH.  H] 

morally  good  whicli  llie  gos|>el  lialh  decUired  and  confirmed  lo  be 
BO ;  and  hj  ihia  shift  tliey  Ihink  lo  .tvoid  the  absurdity  of  flying 
to  the  blind  guide  of  corrupt  nulnre  to  judge  of  these  colors,  viz., 
what  is  moral  and  what  is  not.  Mr.  Primrose  therefore  eicludcB 
the  foarih  commandment  from  being  moral,  Ihe  other  ninu  being 
ratilied  by  the  light  of  the  gospel,  which  ihb  (he  SMtli)  is  not ; 
but  if  his  meaning  be,  tluit  there  must  be  a  general  ratification 
of  Inws  moral  by  the  verdict  of  the  gospel,  then  llie  fourth  com- 
mandment can  not  be  excluded  from  being  moral,  because  it  haih 
a  rat  ill  cat  ion  in  general  from  the  gospel;  for  therein  we  read  ihat 
the  moral  law  is  holy,  just,  and  good,  (Bom.  vii.,)  and  lhat  Christ 
carae  not  to  destroy  the  least  jot  or  tittle  of  the  law,  (Matt,  t.,) 
much  less  a  whole  law  of  the  fourth  commandment.  In  the  gos- 
pel also  God  promiscth  lo  write  his  law  upon  our  hearts,  wherein 
the  fourth  commandment  is  not  excepted.  But  if  his  meaning 
be  this,  that  ihe  gospel  must  particularly  mention,  and  so  make  a. 
)>articular  ratificatioD  (as  it  were)  by  name  of  every  moral  law, 
then  hJH  assertion  la  unsound ;  there  being  many  judicial  Uws  of 
Moses  of  which  some  are  wholly  moral,  others  containing  in  them 
something  of  common  and  moral  equity,  which  we  have  no  ex- 
press mention  of  in  the  blessed  gospel ;  and  let  him  turn  over  all 
the  leaves  of  the  gospel,  he  shall  not  And  that  proportion  of  lime, 
which  himself  affirms  lo  be  morel  in  the  fourth  commandment,  to 
be  expressly  and  particularly  mentioned  in  the  gospel ;  and  there- 
fore lhat  also  must  be  excluded  from  being  monil  upon  his  own 
principles,  as  well  as  what  we  contend  for  in  this  commandment 
«o  to  be./ 

77ie»it  33.  "  Some  of  those  who  maintain  the  law  of  the 
Sabbath  lo  be  ceremonial  affirm  that  every  law  in  the  decalogue 
is  not  moral,  upon  this  ground,  to  wit,  because  the  law  is  caUed 
God's  covenant,  which  covenant  they  show,  from  sundry  instances, 
not  only  to  comprehend  morals,  but  also  ceremonials ;  for  they 
make  it  the  excellency  of  the  decalogue  to  comprehend,  as  a  short 
epitome,  all  God's  ordinances,  both  moral  and  ceremonial,  which 
epitome  is  more  largely  opened  in  ihe  writings  of  Moses,  where 
not  only  moral,  but  also  ceremonial  laws  are  expressed  and  dis- 
persed. And  hence  ilicy  think,  that  as  the  other  nine  are  the 
Bummar}'  and  epitome  of  all  moral  ordinances,  so  the  fourth 
commandment,  which  was  kept  with  the  practice  of  ceremonies, 
was  the  summary  and  ejiitomc  of  all  the  ceremonial  ordinances, 
and  hence  the  fourth  commandment  becomes  ceremonial.  Bui 
for  answer  to  this  wily  notion,  unjustly  fathered  upon  Austin  and 
Calvin  by  some,  it  may  thus  far  be  granied,  that  as  the  woni  law 
is  sometimes  taken  more  strictly  for  Ihe  decalogue  only,  (Bom. 

I  Ri.  20 ;    Jamc«  iii.  8.]  unil  fomeiimes  more    largely.  Cur   the 

whole  doctrine  coiitniiied  in  all  ihR  irriliiigs  of  ibe  OM  Teala- 

I  nenl,  wherein  the  gospel  also  is  ctimpii'li ended.  (Ps.  six.  7  ;  cxixi 

[  1.  51,  37.)  BQ  ihe  wonl  eovttiaiit  is  sometimes  taken  more  Htrict- 

I  Iv  Tor  ilie  covenant  of  works,  nhich  is  contained  compendiouiity 

[  ill  the  decalogoe  only,  writ  by  ihe  finger  of  Gctd  in  two  labies, 

.  (Deul.  i*.  13,  14;  Ei.  xxsiv.  38,)  and  Bomatimes  more  largely 

I  lor  all  tlie  holy  writing*  of  Moses.  (Ex.  xxir.  7,  8,  and  xxxiv. 

Ler.  xxvi.  14.     Jer.  xxxiv.  13.)     Now,  although  all  the 

writings  of  Moses  may  be  called  iLe  covenant,  «*  it  is  largely 

taken,  and  so  the  covenant  comprehends  not  only  moral  but 

ceremonial  law?,  yet  they  are  never  called  that  covenant  which 

waa  writ  by   the  finger   of  God-  in   two  tobies  of  stone,   and 

given  to  Moses  ;  and  in  this  atrici  sense  the  word  covenant  com- 

prehcnds  no  other  laws  but  moral,  nor  can  the  places  and  texts 

which  they  allege  evince  the  contrary,  for,  in  that  place  of  £.x. 

xxiT.  7,  it  b  not  said  that  Ihe  inbles  of  the  covenant,  but  the 

I    book  of  the  covenant,  was  read  in  the  audience  of  all  the  peo- 

fit ;  which  book  we  readily  acknowledge  to  comprehend  cere- 

■loniab  aa  well  as  morals,  but  not  the  tables  of  the  covenant,  of 

which  Ihe  question  now  ie.     So  also  when  the  Lord  sailh  (Ex. 

}  xxxiv.  10)  tliiU  he  will  moke  a  covenant,  his  meaning  is,  that  ho 

I  iwill  revive  his  covenant  by  writing,  (as  it  is  there  set  down  in 

I   the  come  chapter.)  in  which  writing  it  is  very  true  that  there  is 

I    mention  made  of  many  ceremonial  laws  :  but  suppose  tliis  cov- 

k  «nant  written  by  Moses  comprehends  sundry  ceremonial  laws, 

\    will  it  ihcrvforo  follow  thai  the  tables  of  ihe  covenant  written 

I   with  the  fiiigrr  of  God  did  the  like  ?     No  such  matter  i  and 

I   therefore  there  is  an  express  difference  put  in  the  same  chapter, 

(ver.  37,  28,)  between  the  covenant  written  by  Moses,  and  the 

I  ten  nummaniimcnls  written  by  the  finger  of  God.     But  secondly, 

I  let  it  be  granted  that  the  decalogue  comprehends  aumroarily  all 

lite  laws  which  are  particularly  dis[>ersed  here  and  theru  in  the 

writings  of  Moses,  yd  it  doth  not  follow  that  there  must  be  one 

«Temonial  hiw  written  by  the  linger  of  God,  and  lifted  up  in  iho 

decalogue  to  be  the  epitome  and  summary  ot'  all   ceremonial 

k  laws  eWwhcre  explained  in  the  writings  of  Moses.     For  all 

I  laws,  wheilu-T  ceremonial  or  judicial,  may  be  referred  to  the 

k  drcaiogae.  as  apfieiidlcee  to  it,  or  applications  of  it.  and  so  to 

f  comprehend  all  other  laws  as  their  summary.     13ul  such  a  sum- 

f  nary  will  no  way  enforce  a  necessity  of  making  any  one  of  them 

b  the  Kpitouie  o1'  (.■ervmontuU,  and  the  other  nine  of  them  of  the 

I  norals,  for  we  know  iltnl  many  judieinl  laws  are  comprehended 

[  ander  nornl  laws,  being  referred  m  npjicndices  thereunto  .by 

I  VOL.  111.  i  ^ 




Ctilvin,  MArl3'r,  Cheninitius,  Ames,  and  stundry  others ;  and  yet 
it  will  not  futlow  from  lience,  that  one  of  the  lav/a  in  the  dec- 
alogue must  be  a  judiciiil  law  as  the  sumniary  of  all  judicials, 
whii^li  are  brandies  of  the  covenant,  aa  well  as  Master  Primrose's 

T/trsi»  3-1.  It  should  not  seem  strange  tbal  that  law,  whicb  in  the 
general  nature  of  it  is  moral,  may,  in  the  particular  application 
ul'  il,  be  uuio  a  thing  ceremonial ;  and  in  this  respect  it  ean  not 
be  denied,  that  the  moral  law  may  comprehend  all  ceremonial 
laws  ;  but  il  will  not  hence  follow,  (as  Mr.  Primrose  infers,)  that 
one  law  in  the  decalogue  must  be  ceremonial  as  (he  head  and 
summary  of  all  ceremonial  taw^,  because,  we  say,  ceremonial  laws 
may  be  comprehended  under  some  moral  law,  as  special  appli- 
calioni  thereof;  c.  g.,  it  is  a  moral  law  to  worship  God  acconling 
U>  his  own  will,  and  not  nS\cr  man's  inventions,  as  the  second 
commandment  holds  it  forth.  Now,  in  the  application  of  this 
law,  the  Lord  points  out  his  own  inetiEuted  worship  in  sundry 
significant  ceremonies,  sacrifices,  sacraments,  elc. ;  which  partic- 
ular institutions  (though  ceremonial)  are  to  be  referred  imio,  and 
are  comprehended  under,  tlie  second  commandment,  which  is  a 
moral  law  -,  for  if  God  will  be  worshiped  with  his  own  worship 
according  to  Ihis  commandment,  then  it  is  necessary  for  the  Lord 
to  show  (and  chat  under  his  commandment)  what  those  institu-. 
tiona  he,  wherein  he  will  be  worshiped,  many  of  which  are  (xr- 
emonial,  which  are  therefore  directly  comprehended  here. 

T^etii  3b.  There  is  therefore  no  necessity  of  making  one 
law  in  the  decalogue  to  be  ceremonial,  that  it  may  be  the  sum- 
mary bead  of  all  ceremonials,  viz.,  because  ceremonials  aro 
branches  of  the  covenant,  which  is  the  decalogue  ;  for  upon  the 
like  ground,  there  must  be  one  judicial  law  abto  as  ihe  summary 
of  all  judicials,  nay,  one  evangelical  law  also  as  the  head  of  all 
evangelicals,  sprinkled  here  and  there  in  Moses'  writings,  of 
which  we  read,  (John  v.  43 ;  Rev.  x.  fr-B,  with  Dent.  xsx. 
12,  IH  i  Gul.  iii.  8,  with  Gen.  xii.  3  ;)  for  judicials  and  evangel- 
icals are  branches  of  the  covenant  as  well  as  ceremonials,  if  Mr. 
Primrose's  principle  he  true ;  but  if,  by  his  own  confession, 
nine  of  Cliem  arc  morale,  and  one  of  them  only  the  head  of  cer< 
emoniuls,  how  shall  judicial  and  evangelical  summaries  corae  in  ? 
which  either  he  must  make  room  for  in  the  decalogue,  or  ac- 
knowledge his  foundation  to  be  rotten,  upon  which  he  hath  built 
one  ceremonial  law  among  ihe  nine  morals. 

T/tm»  36,  It  is  true,  that  among  men  Ihe  same  boily  of  laws 
may  be  framed  up  of  divers  articles,  as  Mr.  Primrose  pleads :  but 
thai  the  decalogue  was  such  a  body  as  had  ceremonials  mixed 
wilJi  morals,  it  can  never  be  made  good  by  any  color  of  proof, 


except  it  be  that  which  we  have  shown  will  as  Rtrongjj  enforce 
an  iniroduclion  of  some  one  judicial  and  anolher  evangelical  law 
into  the  decaloguG,  as  well  as  one  cei'cmouial ;  but  such  a  con- 
fusion of  law  aud  gospel,  evRDgeliculs  and  judicial^,  ceremonials 
'•and   mornl-s  the  bles^  God  Rhhors;  for  il  neither  suits  with 
God's  n-isdom  and  end  in  giving  llie  law,  nor  yet  wiih  man's 
weakness,  (which  God  pilies,)  to  make  such  a  jumbling  and  cod- 
I  fiuioD  of  things  together ;  for  who  can  then  lell  what  law  is  moral, 
I  and  what  evangelical,  and  what  ceremonial,  unless  it  be  (ns  was 
■Iiawn)  by  flying  for  light  to  the  dictates  and  instinct  of  nature, 
•  to  show  gnto  poor  deceitful  man  what  laws  are  moral  and  what 
not.  wlierei[)  the  remedy  would  have  been  as  bait  as  the  disease. 
Theii*  37.     If  "  there  must  be  one  law  in  the  decalogue  cer- 
emonial, that  so  the  more  Authority  may  be  procured  hereby  (as 
Ur.  Primrose  pleads)  unto  all  God's  ordiminces,  and  therefore 
e  of  the  ceremonials  was  written  in  the  decalogue  with  God'a 
own  finger,  and  honored  with  the  like  prerogatives  as  the  moral 
s  were,  which  were  immediately  spokeo  by  God  himself," 
1  (if  this  reasoning  be  solid)  why  was  not  one  judicial  and 
[  uotfa«r  evangelical  precept  alike  honored  abo?     For  was  there 
L  not  ms  much  need  lo  procure  authority  to  this  as  well  as  to  cere- 
I  noniols?  And  yet  we  see  their  authority  was  sufficiently  procured 
I  irilboat  being  thuffied  into  the  decalogue,  and  so  might  ceremo- 
\  sialsKUo. 

T^etit  38.  There  were  three  sorts  of  laws  which  are  com- 
I  Bonly  known,  and  which  were  most  eminently  appearing  among 
f  tbc  Jews:  I.  Moral.     2.  Ceremonial.     3.  Judicial. 

7%<m  89.  The  moral  respected  their  manners  os  they  were 
tien,  and  arc  therefore  called  moral.  The  ceremonial  respected 
ban  as  a  church,  and  as  such  a  kind  of  chureh-  The  judicial 
■a  a  oomroonwcallh,  and  as  that  particular  commonwealth. 
Moral  laws  were  to  govern  them  as  a  human  society,  ceremonial 
u  a  Mcred  society.  Judicial  as  a  civil  society.  Thus  the  learned 
■peak,  and  being  oindidly  understood,  are  true. 

7%«fi'f  40.  The  moral  law,  contained  in  the  decalogue,  i* 
DOlbing  else  butjJiC'4»w.«{nature  revived,  or  a  second  edition 
and  impression  of  that  prTmJlive'  and~  perfect  law  of  nature, 
1  which  in  the  gtato  of  innocency  was  engraven  upon  man's  heart, 
I  Ibtit  now  again  written  upon  tables  of  stone,  by  the  Anger  of  God. 
K  For  man  being  made  in  the  image  of  God,  he  had  therefore  the  law 
|'«f  holiness  and  righteousness,  in  which  God's  image  consisted, 
I  Written  in  his  heart ;  but  having  hy  his  fall  broken  this  tabic,  nnci 
r  Imi  lhi>  image,  neither  knowing  nor  doing  the  will  of  God  through  i 
Klb«  law  of  sin  now  engraven  on  it,  hence  the  Lord  hath  in  much    ' 


pily  made  known  hi?  Irw  airiiiii,  Bi^d  pivcn  us  n  fair  copy  of  it 
)u  the  tWQ  iiibles  of  alone,  wliit;h  are  ihe  rapy  of  that  which  wm 
writ  upon  innn'^  heart  at  Hrst,  beciiifsc  the  Ui'dt  labte  cooiaifig  love 
to  Go<l  in  tioliness,  the  second  love  to  auui  in  rishlmusness ; 
which  holineea  and  righteousness  are  the  two  parts  of   God's 

■  image  whicli  was  once  enjTravcn  upon  man's  soul,  in  his  primi- 
Itive  and  perfect  estate.  (Kph.  iv.  2-1.)/  Nor  indeed  do  I  see 
mU(F*thal  Popish  argument  will  be  otherwise  answered,  jileading 

for  B  possibiliiy  in  man  to  keep  the  law  perfectly  in  his  lapsed 
and  fallen  estate  in  (hid  life,  for,  say  Ihcy,  God  makes  no  laws  of 
impossible  things,  it  being  unjust  for  God  to  require  and  exact 
that  of  a  man  whieh  he  is  not  able  to  do ;  to  which  it  is  com- 
moldy  and  truly  answered,  that  man  had  once  power  to  keep  the 
law  in  his  innocent  estate,  and  hence,  though  man  he  not  able  to 
keep  it  now,  yet  God  may  require  it,  because  he  once  gave  him 
power  to  keep  it;  and  that  therefore  it  is  no  more  unjust  lo exact 
such  obedience  which  he  can  not  perform,  Ilian  for  a  creditor  to  re- 
quire his  money  of  his  broken  debtor,  or  spendthrift,  who  ie  now 
failed,  (as  they  say.)  and  not  able  to  repay.  Man,  therefore, 
y  having  once  power  to  keep  the  law,  and  now  having  no  power,  this 
V  argues  strongly  that  the  law  of  the  decalogue  contains  nothing 
\but  what  vrae  once  written  as  a  law  of  life  upon  his  heart  in  his 
pHnocenl  estate ;  for  I  see  not  how  God's  Justice  can  be  cleared, 

■  if  he  exacts  such  obedience  in  the  decalogue  which  is  impossible 
for  man  to  give,  unless  the  very  same  law  and  power  of  obedience 
was  written  upon  his  heart  at  first;  and  therefore  it  is  a  wild 
notion  of  theirs  who  think  tlial  the  covenant  of  works  which  Grod 

F  mode  with  Adam  is  not  the  same  for  matter  with  the  covenant 
^  I  of  works  expressed  in  the  moral  law  ;  for  we  see  that  lliere  is 
Hi!?  same  image  of  holiness  and  righteousness  required  iu  the 
tables  of  stone,  as  the  condition  of  this  covenant,  which  was  once 
written  upon  man's  heart,  and  required  in  the  same  maimer  of 
him.  Now,  this  law,  thus  revived  and  reprinted,  is  the  deca- 
logue, because  most  natural  and  suitable  ti 
it  was  made  most  perfect ;  therefore  ii 
ual  i  the  substance  also  of  this  law  be 
holiness  toward  Grod,  and  righteousness  toward  man.  (Mat 
37,  3!).  Luke  i.)  Hence  also  this  law  must  needs  be  moral,  uni- 
versal, and  perpetual,  unless  any  should  be  so  wicked  as  to  imagine 
it  to  be  no  duly  of  universal  or  perpetual  equity,  either  to  love  God 
or  to  love  man,  to  perform  duties  of  holiness  toward  the  one  or 
duties  of  righleousoess  toward  the  other.  Hence,  again,  the 
things  commaiiiled  in  this  law  are  therefore  coragiauded  because 
they  are  good,  and  are  therefore  moral,  unless  any  shall  think 


1  nature,  whei 
<  universal  and  perpet- 
;  love  to  God  and  man. 

TOE   MOIf.VLtTV    OF  TOK   6A1!B.VTII.  53 

Ih&l  it  i»  nor  good  in  ilsoir  la  love  Goil  or  mnn,  to  be  holy  or 
ighteoQ* :  and  which  is  ^till  ob^^ervable,  ilici'e  is  Ruuh  a  love 
required  Iieri.-in,  and  ^iidi  a  loveliness  put  upon  these  laws,  as 
ihai,  by  virtue  of  these,  all  our  obedience  in  other  things  which 
ftre  not  moral  becomes  lovely  ;  for  there  were  many  ceremonial 
obMrvances,  in  whieh  and  by  which  the  people  of  God  expressed 
ihfir  love  to  God,  as  SI.  Primrose  truly  concludes  from  Deut. 
u  l-6,Nnd  Matt.  xsii.  37,  a8,40;  but  yet  Ibis  love  did  arise  by 
virtue  of  a  moral  rule,  for  iheretbre  it  was  lovely  to  worship 
God  in  ceremonial  dutie*,  because  it  was  lovely  to  worship 
God  with  bi»  own  worship,  {of  which  these  were  parts,)  which  is 

~  tlie  moral  rule  of  the  second  commandment.  And  hence  M. 
Primrose  may  see  his  gross  mistake  in  mnkinp:  one  law  of  the 

•  decalogue  cert^monial,  because  the  summary  of  the  dcealogue 
bring  love  to  God  and  love  to  man,  and  our  love  to  God  being 
ibown  in  ceremonial  as  well  as  in  moral  duties,  because  our  love 
Is  seen  and  ^hown  in  our  obedience  to  ail  the  commundraeDts  of 
God.  ceremonial  as  well  as  moral.  For  though  there  be  love  in 
Mremonial  duties,  it  is  not  so  ranch  in  respect  of  themselves  as 
In  resperl  of  some  moral  rule,  by  virtue  of  which  such  duties  are 
attended.  _ 

77if$i*  \\.  The  ceremonial  law,  consisting  chiefly  of  types 
ind  shadows  of  things  to  come,  (Heb,  viii.  5.)  and  therefore 
bcmg  to  cease  when  the  body  was  come,  (Ool.  ii.  17,)  was  not 
therefore  perpetual,  (as  the  law  monil,)  but  tempoi;pry,  and  of 
binding  power  only  to  the  nation  of  the  Jews  and  iheir  proselytes, 
■nil  not  putting  any  tie  upon  all  nations,  as  the  moral  law  did. 
Every  ceremonial  law  was  lem]H)niry,  but  every  terapomry  law 
was  not  ceremonial,  (aa  some  Kay,)  us  is  demonstrable  from  sun- 
dry judicials,  which  in  their  determinations  were  proper  to  that 
nation,  while  the  .lewish  [lolity  continued,  and  are  not,  therefore, 
DOW  lo  be  observitl.  ^^ 

7%t$i»  42.  The  judicial  laws,  some  of  them  being  hedges 
and  fnnc^  to  safeguard  both  moral  and  ceremonial  precepts, 
their  binding  power  was  therefore  mixed  and  various,  for  those 
trhicfi  did  Mfeguard  any  moral  law,  (which  is  per[>cIUHl.)  whether 
by  just  punishments  or  otherwise,  do  still  morally  bind  all  na- 


a  the/ 

s  as  then,  and  there  is  as  much  need  u 

the  ptwervation  of  these  fences  to  preserve  these  laws  in  these 
tlm«s,  and  at  all  times,  m  well  as  then,  there  being  as  much  dan- 
ger of  the  treading  down  of  those  laws  by  the  wild  beasts  of  the 
world  and  bruii»h  men  (sometimes  even  in  churches)  now  aaV 

then ;  and  henciyGod  would  have  all  nations  preserve  their  fenceal 

forever,  as  he  would  have  ibat  law  preserved  forever  which 
the«e  aafei;unrd ;  hut,  on  the  oilier  aide,  ihe^e  judteials  which  did 
gnfeguard  ceremoniHl  laws  which  we  know  were  not  perpetual, 
but  proper  lo  thai  nation,  hence  Ihose  judieinle  which  compass 
lliese  ahoul  are  not  perpelual  nor  universal ;  the  ceremoniala 
llieiiig  plucked  up  hy  their  roots,  lo  what  purpose  then  should  their 
llences  and  hedges  sianU  ?  As,  on  tlie  conlniry,  the  morals  abid- 
ing, why  should  nut  their  judiciaJs  and  fences  remikin?  The 
learned  generally  douhi  not  to  affirm  that  Aluseii'  jiidicials  bind 
all  naliona,  so  lar  forth  as  they  contain  any  moral  equity  in 
them,  which  moral  equity  doih  appear  not  only  in  respect  of 
the  end  of  the  law,  when  it  is  ordered  for  common  and  univer- 
■nl  good,  but  chleHy  in  res|>cct  of  the  law  which  they  safeguard 
and  fence,  which  if  it  be  moral,  it  is  most  just  and  e(]ual,  that 
either  the  same  or  like  judicial  fence  (according  to  some  fit  pro- 
portion) should  preserve  it  still,  beeause  it  is  but  just  and  equal 
thai  a  moral  and  universal  law  should  be  universally  preserved ; 
from  whence,  by  the  way,  the  weakness  of  their  rea^oniugs  may 
>>e  observed,  who,  that  they  may  take  away  tlie  power  of  the 
civil  magistrate  in  matters  of  the  first  table,  (which  once  he  lind 
in  the  Jewish  commonwealth,)  alfirni  that  such  civil  power  then 
did  arise  from  the  judicial,  and  not  from  any  moral  law  ;  when- 
Bs  it  is  manifciit  Uiat  this  his  power  in  preserving  God's  worship 
]iure  from  idolatrous  and  profane  mixtures,  according  to  the 
judicial  laws,  was  no  more  but  a  fence  and  safeguard  set  about 
moral  commandments  ;  which  fences  and  preservatives  are  there- 
fore (for  substance)  lo  continue  in  as  much  power  and  authority 
now  as  they  did  in  those  days,  as  long  as  such  laws  continue  in 
iheir  morality,  which  these  preserve;  the  duties  of  the  first  table 
being  also  as  much  moral  as  those  of  the  second,  lo  the  preserv- 
ing of  which  latter  from  hurt  and  spoil  in  respect  of  their  mo- 
rality, no  wise  man  questions  the  extent  of  his  power. 

TXesi'f  43.  If,  therefore,  the  question  be  now  made  whelher 
the  law  of  (he  fourth  commandment  be  moral  or  nu,  we  must 
then  remember  that  the  true  state  of  the  question  is  not  in  this, 
lo  wit,  whether  the  law  of  the  Sabbath  be  a  priuciple  of  the 
light  of  nature,  known  and  evident  of  itself,  or  at  least  such 
HE  every  man  that  hath  the  use  of  reason  may  reitdily  find  out 
without  some  external  revelation,  (as  Mr.  Ironside  injuriously 
slities  it.  wrestling  herein  with  his  own  shadow,  with  many 
others  of  bis  fellowship  in  this  controversy.)  For  moiiitity  (as 
hath  been  declured)  is  of  larger  extent  than  such  a  naturulity. 
But  ihe  question  is,  whether  it  is  one  of  those  laws,  which  is 
therefore  cummmaudeU  because  it  is  holy,  just,  and  good  in  itself. 


whether  man  see  it  by  any  previous  Ijglii  of  corrupt  natnr^ 
ay  or  no  ;  and  being  Ihus  crunmiiiided  tn  sui-li  a  law,  wliether  it 
)>«  nni  iherctbre  of  jierpetual  anil  univcrsiil  obliguIJoD,  binding 
all  natbns  and  perwnd  in  all  ages,  in  their  hcaria,  livtss,  niaonen^ 
In  ifae  ob^ei'vnnce  thereof,  as  a  part  of  that  lioliuese  we  ow 
God,  and  which  God  requires  of  men  according  to  niles  of  morale 
equity  :  or,  on  tlie  conlrary,  whether  it  be  not  rulher  a  tjpica(^ 
ceremonial,  liguralive,  and  tempomry  precept,  binding  only  sonaA 
(■erisons,  or  that  one  nation  of  the  Jews  fur  some  time,  from  ihs 
obedience  of  which  law  Christiana  (in  respect  of  any  law  of  God) 
ntiB  now  exempted. 

TTirgit  44,  For  clearing  up  whereof  it  may  not  be  aroisB  Uf 
1:ike  notice  of  the  agreement  (at  lea^t  in  word^}  herein,  on  aHr 
Lands,  even  by  those  who  oppose  (hat  morality  of  tlie  Sabbatk 
which  we  plead  for.  All  sides  agree  in  this,  viz.,  that  the  lair 
of  ibia  fourth  commandment  concerning  the  Sabbath  is  moraL. 
Bat  aa  the  ditTerenci's  about  the  meaning  of  Tu  e«  Petrut  are' 
man^.  so  here  the  dillii^uUy  lies  to  know  how,  and  in  what  sensfr 
nnd  respect,  it  may  be  called  moral ;  for  3U.  Ironside  expressly' 
consents  in  ihi?,  viz.,  "  iliitl  all  the  coromnndtnenls  of  the  dcca*' 
logne  are  moral,  but  every  one  in  his  proportion  and  degree 
and  «o  (suiih  he)  is  that  of  the  Sabbath  ;  it  is  moral  for  suhslonca^ 
bat  not  for  circumstance. 

"  Sbster  Primrose  also  (when  he  is  awalie)  expressly  confess- 
eth  thus  much,  viz.,  that  the  Sabbath  is  moral  in  its  foundalioo, 
end.  morrow,  and  principal  substance ;  and  that  a  stinted  time  ia 
muntl.  and  grounded  on  the  principles  of  nature ;  and  therefore 
ifae  Gentiles  (saith  he)  had  their  set  day^  of  religion ;  and  this 
(he  tells  as)  is  ratified  by  the  gospel,  wliich  commendeth  to  the 
faithful  the  assembling  of  themselves  together  for  word  and 
sacmmenis,  and  CDnscifuenily  tUitt  iliey  have  appointed  timet' 
lo  attend  upon  them,  wliercin  the  word  of  God  be  read  and 
preached  as  under  the  Old  Tesinmcni  every  Sabbalh  day;  nay, 
he  yields  yet  more,  viz.,  that  not  only  stinted  timep,  but  tiiat 
niao  there  should  be  a  convenient  pro|x)rlion  and  suiruble  fre- 
fpvnry  of  time  for  God's  service,  now  under  the  gospel  as  under 
liie  luw  ;  and  therefore  atlirms  that  the  Jewish  annual  feasts  and 
new  moons,  being  but  once  a  year  or  once  a  month,  und  so  being 
rare  and  w-ldum,  could  nut  teach  us  the  couvctiicnt  and  most 
suilai>le  frequency  of  God's  public  service,  as  the  Sabbath  did^. 
which  retorned  weekly  ;  and  therefore  be  aaith  that  ihe  com* 
niandmcot  runs  not  thus,  viz..  Remember  to  keep  the  new  moon% 
but.  Remember  to  keep  holy  the  Sabbath  day.  80  that  by  U> 
PriainMe's  cuucesaioo.  nut  only  a  time,  but  a  atinled  time,  not  only 


iDled  time,  bul  al.'io  such  a  conTc^oient  proporlion  and  suitable 
frequency  of  lime,  as  is  once  in  seven  days,  is  morally  holy  by 
I  virtue  of  Ihe  f'ouMli  commaiidtiieiit. 

"  GoRianis  oLio  condudeB  (bnt  tbe  public  worsbtp  of  God,  re- 
I  ^ired  in  the  fourlh  commandment,  calls  for  observation,  liot 
I  only  of  certain,  but  nl?o  of  sufficieni  days  for  worship ;  and  what 
Aege  sufficient  days  be,  is  to  be  gathered  from  the  fourth  com- 
nuuidment,  iiiz.,  that  they  be  not  more  rare  and  less  frequent 
than  the  weekly  Sabbatha  of  tbe  Itiraelile^,  because,  if  God  (as 
he  shows)  challenged  a  weekly  Sabbath  of  a  stiff-necked  people 
laden  with  the  bunien  of  many  other  festivals  and  ceremoniej^, 
how  then  should  Christians,  freed  frou  their  yokes  and  bur- 
dens, have  ihem  less  frequent  ?  " 

Master  Breervrood  also  lo  Ibe  like  purpose  professelh,  that 
Chriatiann  should  not  be  less  devout  and  religious  in  celebrating 
Ihe  Lord*e  day  than  the  Jews  were  in  celebrating  their  Sabbath  ; 
and  his  reason  (laboring  with  some  spice  of  a  contradiction)  is 
this,  viz.,  because  the  obligation  of  our  ihankfulness  to  Giid  is 
more  than  theirs,  although  the  oblignlion  of  his  commandment 
lo  us  in  that  behalf  is  less  ;  fur  I  confess  it  is  beyond  my  shallow- 
ness to  conceive  iiow  the  thankfulness  should  be  more,  and  the 
commandment  less,  unless  he  will  imagine  some  such  Popish 
work  as  exceeds  the  command. 

WalltBus  comes  almost  quite  over  the  threshold  unto  us,  and 
maintains,  upon  solid  arguments,  "that,  by  the  force  and  analogy 
of  ihis  fourth  commandment,  all  the  (rue  worshipers  of  God 
are  bound  to  the  euict  observation  of  one  day  in  the  circle  and 
compass  of  seven  ; "  and  then  he  produceth  a  cloud  of  witnesses, 
both  ancient  fathers  and  ihe  chief  of  our  kle  reformers,  tes- 
tifying [0  the  same  morality  of  one  day  in  »ei'en,  which  him- 
self maintains ;  that  whoever  shall  read  him  herein  would  won- 
der how  it  should  i-ver  enter  into  the  hearts  of  learned  men  (as 
White,  Rogers,  Dow,  tbe  historian,  and  many  others)  to  imagine 
and  go  about  lo  befool  the  World,  as  if  ihe  moratily  of  a  seventh 
day  was  the  lale  and  sour  fruit  growing  out  of  the  crabbed  and 
rigid  slock  of  some  English  Purilatis  and  reformers,  wherein  they 
ore  forsaken  of  all  iheir  fellows,  whom  in  all  other  things  they 
so  much  admire  in  oilier  reformed  churches.  It  being  therefore 
confessed  on  all  bands  thai  the  Sabbath  is  moral,  (though  I  con- 
fess at  other  times  our  adversaries  unsay  this,  at  least  in  their 
arguments,)  the  controversy  therefore  only  lies  in  this,  viz.,  how 
and  in  what  respect  it  should  be  so. 
I  Tlteti*  45.  The  general  consent  herein  also  is  this,  lo  wit, 
I  liiat  the  morality  of  the  Sabbath  chiefly  is  in  respect  of  some 

THE   UOnAl-ITT   OF   THK   S*BRATH.  S7 

generality,  or  in  respect  of  something  which  in  mare  general  in 
ihis  commandment,  rather  than  in  respeut  of  th«t  particular  day 
which  the  commandment  doth  also  point  at ;  far  if  the  morality 
of  it  (lid  lie  in  observing  that  particular  day  only,  faow  could  there 
be  a  change  of  tlmt  day  to  another?  For  if  the  morality  of  a 
Subbath  wm  liniiied  unto  a  particularity,  or  to  that  one  partit>- 
olar  day,  it  is  then  impossible  that  any  other  day  to  which  that 
first  is  changed  should  be  moral  by  virtue  of  the  xame  command- 
ment ;  but  we  shall  show  in  tit  place,  that  the  day  is  lawfully 
changed,  and  morally  observed,  and  therefore  that  which  is  in 
thi*  commandment  firstly  moral  miut  of  necessity  be  somewhat 
more  general. 

7Ti<«>  4G,  The  general  which  we  acknowledge  to  he  moral 
in  this  command  (rightly  understood)  is  a  seventh  day.  Our'. 
adverMiries  would  make  it  more  general,  and  resolve  it  into  a 
day  or  some  day  for  solemn  worship;  yet  when  they  are  forced 
to  we  and  acknowledge,  by  the  dint  of  argument,  that  this  is  loo 
general,  because  thus  the  commandment  may  be  observed,  if  one 
day  in  a  thousand,  or  once  in  one's  life  it  be  sanctified,  they  do, 
tlicreforc,  many  times  come  nearer  to  us,  to  somewhat  less  gen- 
end  than  a  day,  viz.,  lo  a  stinted,  filed,  and  appointed  day,  and 
to  siicli  an  appointed  day  as  contains  such  a  aufllcient  proportion 
of  time  for  God,  with  convenient  frequency,  no  less  frequent 
than  thein  in  the  Old  Testament,  which  was  every  seventh  day, 
as  may  be  seen  Thess.  i.  44 ;  and  truly,  thus  much  being  ac- 
knowledged by  tbem,  one  would  think  that  the  controversy  (with 
this  sort  of  men)  was  brought  unto  a  comfortable  and  quiet  is^ue 
and  full  agreement ;  but  it  is  strange  to  see  how  contrary  the 
langtwge  b  of  these  men  sleeping,  from  what  it  is  when  they  are 
Awake.  They  strike  fiercely  at  a  seventh  day,  and  a  determinate 
timo,  at  impossible  to  be  moral,  when  they  meet  with  them  in 
the  dark,  and  yet  we  see  acknowledge  them  (in  effect)  to  be 
manJ,  when  they  meet  with  them  sometimes  in  the  lighi. 

7%«tii  47.  But  because  a  seventh  day  may  be  accounted  con- 
venient by  some,  and  moral  byothers,aiid  because  the  determina- 
tion of  it  may  be  made  by  some  either  more  lai  or  narrow,  vii., 
either  to  any  in  seven,  which  man  or  the  church  may  appoint, 
or  to  such  a  seventh  day  as  God  shall  determine,  it  is,  iherc- 
forr,  neudfui,  for  the  clearing  up  of  this  controversy,  to  seek  out. 
with  an  impartial  and  sober  mind,  the  true  meaning  of  the  fourth 
commandment,  and  to  inquire  more  iiarticularly  and  euiutly 
what  is  required  in  it,  and  what  is  commanded  by  virtue  of  it, 
wUcli  tome  able  men.  not  taking  a  right  observation  of  in  the 
dark  aw)  lemgwsiuous  times  of  controversy,  have  therefore  made 


miserable  shipwreck,  not  only  of  tlie  iriilh,  but  al*o  of  (beiD- 
eelres,  antl  souls  of  otliurs. 

TTiesis  48.  Tlie  tilings  wUioh  are  momlly  enjoined  iii  thU  com- 
mandment nre  these  two ;  — 

1.  Some  iLingg  are  Primario,  i.  e.,  primnrilj,  firstly,  and  more 
generally  morul. 

2>  Some  Iliin^  are  Secundariu  ;  i.  o^  secondarily,  dcriTatirely, 
and  conscquetiliy  moral. 

A  time,  h  day,  a  seventh  day  of  rest  are  in  the  first  respect 
moral,  but  in  the  other  respect  this  or  that  particular  Geventh 
day  may  be  said  to  be  moral.  Things  primarily  moral  are  per- 
petual ;  things  secondarily  moral  are  not  necestsarily  so.  As,  for 
example,  to  honor  superiors  and  fathers,  whether  of  common- 
*  wealth  or  family,  is  primarily  moral ;  hut  to  honor  these  or  those 
particular  superiors  is  secondarily  moral,  because  our  honoring 
of  them  ariselh  from  that  primary  and  general  law  of  moral 
equity,  viz.,  that  if  our  falhers  are  lo  be  honored,  then,  in  the 
second  place,  it  follows,  tliat  these  and  those  particular  persons, 
being  our  lawful  fathers,  are  to  be  honored  also.  To  honor  our 
fatliers  whom  God  hath  set  over  us  is  perpetual ;  to  honor  these 
or  those  particular  fathers  is  not  perpetual,  because  themselves 
are  not  perpetual,  but  changeable.  It  was  a  moral  duly  to  honor 
this  particular  King  David,  but  it  was  not  perpetual ;  for  wtien 
David  was  taken  away,  ihey  were  not  bound  to  honor  King  Duvid 
KDj  more,  when  King  Solomon,  bis  son,  became  liis  successor : 
nor  was  it  a  ceremonial  duty  to  honor  this  or  that  particular 
king,  because  it  ivaa  changeable  from  one  lo  another,  but  it  was  a 
moral  duty  so  to  do ;  wherein  the  law  and  rule  is  not  changed, 
(it  being  primarily  moral,)  but  only  the  object,  which  we  are 
bound  to  honor  secondarily  in  respect  of  the  general  rule.  So  it 
is  in  this  law  of  the  Sabbath/  To  keep  a  day,  a  seventh  day's 
Sabbath,  is  perpetual,  it  being  primarily  moral;  but  to  observe 
this  or  tliat  particular  day  is  of  ilself  changeable,  being  seconda- 
rily moral ;  for  if  it  be  a  moral  duty  to  sanctify  a  seventh  day 
which  God  shall  appoint,  then  it  is  moral,  (as  it  were,)  in  the 
second  place,  to  sanctify  this  or  that  seventh  interchangeably 
which  God  doth  appoint ;  and  yet  it  doth  not  follow  that  this 
-or  that  particular  seventh  is  in  itself  ceremonial,  because  it  is 
changeable  ;  for  in  such  a  change  the  moral  rule  is  not  changed, 
■  but  the  moral  object  only,  lo  which  it  is  morally  applied :  the 
duty  is  not  changed,  but  only  the  day ;  and  in  this  respect  it 
should  not  seem  hard  to  make  some  things  moral  which  are  not 
perpetual  ;  for  laws  primarily  moral  are  properly  perpetual,  but 
laws  secondarily  moral,  not  necessarily  so,  but  changeable,  b»- 


Tilt:  uouALiTir  ov  Tiit:  sah[(.iti[.  51) 

CKUM.  aa  harh  been  wiid,  berein  ihere  id  no  cliange  of  the  rule, 
but  oalv  of  ibe  object  or  a]>plicatioti  of  the  rule,  wliii^h  mHiy  bo 
variously  and  yet  morally  observed, 

nesit  iS.  This  dUiinctioQ  of  things  primurily  and  secoitda- 
rily  moral  Ls  taken  from  tlie  truth  of  ihiag^j,  and  n'hich  tlioae 
who  study  this  conlroverey  will  see  iiieinseives  forced  unlo  by 
the  shifts  and  fuUaciea  of  the  adversitrics  of  the  truth  herein  ;  the 
Cominandmenid  of  God  are  exceeding  brond.  according  to  David'a 

,  measure,  (Pi.  cxix.  96,)  and  very  eumprehen^ive,  and  hence 
the  generals  include  many  particulars,  and  eometinies  tbe  par- 

,  ticulare  have  a  special  respect  to  ibiogs  more  general,  as  is  evi- 
dent in  the  Mcond  and  Sfth  commiUidmeutB,  whitrh  synecdoche 

I   Ifr.  Broad  acknowledgeth  to  be  in  all  other  commaods  except 

'    Ibe  Sabbath,  wherein  he  will  have  no  general  understood,  but 

*   only  a  comroandinent  to  obsorre  that  particular  day  only,  that  eo 

'  he  may  go  one  step  farther  tlian  some  of  hi:j  betters,  and  utterly 
Rboli«h  the  morality  of  thb  commaud ;  but  whether  this  com- 
naodmcMit  ia  so  narrowly  restrained,  will  appear  more  fully  iii 

r   showing  the  truth  of  this  distinction  out  of  the  coinmnndment 

I    moru  particularly. 

.  Tketit  50.  Those  things  first  which  are  primarily  and  more 
generally  moral,  and  morally  eommanded,  are  these  three :  — 

'        1.  That  there  be  some  solemn  t-onvenient  time  set  apart  for 

'    GudV  worship. 

8.  That  tJiis  time   be  not  any  small  pittance  of  time,  but  a 

I  •olrmn  day  of  worshi|i,  bearing  the  most  meet  proportion  to  those 
days  man  hnih  fur  himself. 

3.  Thai  this  day  be  not  any  day  indelinilely  which  man  sees 
meet,  but  (as  it  is  in  the  commandment)  the  Sabbatb  or  rest 
day,  whicli  God  himself  interprets  and  determines  to  a  seventh 

iiome  of  our  adversaries  in  this  controversy  will  not  acknowl- 
1  eilg«  any  »et  lime  or  day  to  be  moral  by  virtue  of  this  command- 
I  mvnx.  because  they  tliink  tliat  that  panicuhtr  seventh  day  from 
the  creation  ia  only  eommanded,  but  now  abolished  under  the 
gmpel ;  and  it  only  is  commanded  (they  suy)  because  it  is  only 
[  cspresavd  and  mmle  mention  of  in  the  commandment.  I  confesa 
L  that  thai  particular  seventh  is  expressed  and  jxiinted  at,  but  not 
[  only  ezprossod,  (as  we  shall  show  in  fit  plan; ;)  but  suppose  it 
I  wvre  granted,  that  that  seventh  only  is  exprcased,  yet  it  will  not 
I  IbDow  that  therefore  a  seventh  <lay,  and  consequently  a  day,  and 
I  KaMequmlly  a  time  uf  worship,  is  excluded ;  for  look,  as  it  is  in 
I  llw  iHKund  cummiuidmenl,  we  see  the  worship  of  a 


f  b  [NUllcuUrly  t< 

I,  and  yet  that  which  i 

aven  image 
c  general  19 



:  OF  ' 



itho  herein  forbidden,  xiz.,  the  worship  ot'  God  b]/  human  inven- 
tions :  and  why  may  not  the  like  general  be  enjoined  by  com- 
mitnding  ihai  pariiculiir  siwenth  in  the  fourth  roramandment  ? 
Others  of  our  adversnries,  on  the  contrary,  acknowledge,  there- 
fore, that  in  this  particular  seventh  (which  they  make  ceremo- 
nial) something  more  general  and  moral  is  herein  required  ;  but 
this  general  they  limit  lo  a  time  or  some  day  of  worship,  but  it 
Bevenih  day  which  is  more  general  than  that  particular  seventh, 
yet  less  general  than  a  day  or  lime,  they  fly  from  this  ns  from 
some  serpent  or  bugbear,  and  will  not  admit  it  oa  any  thing  gener- 
ally  moral  in  this  commandment.  But  it  ia  very  observable  in 
this  conlroverey,  that  upon  the  earae,  grounds  on  which  ihey 
would  exclude  this  general  of  a  seventh  from  being  moral,  they 
may  as  well  exclude  their  own  generals,  viz.,  a  time  or  a  day, 
from  being  moral ;  for  if  they  think  it  irrational,  that  because  a 
particulnr  seventh  day  is  required,  that  therefore  a  seventh  day 
more  general  can  not  be  commanded,  why  is  it  not  as  irratioruU, 
upon  the  same  ground,  to  exclude  a  time,  a  day,  also  ?  Surely  a 
seventh  day  lies  nearer  the  bosom  of  a  particular  seventh,  and  is 
of  nearer  kin  to  it  than  a  day.  And  I  marvel  lliat  they  should 
gather  a  solemn  time  and  day  of  worship,  which  Is  more  gen- 
eral, rather  than  a  seventh  out  of  that  particular  day,  as  nut 
possibly  to  be  intended,  although  in  a  manner  expressed  in  the 
commandment  itself.  I  know  there  are  some  who  think  that 
there  is  nothing  generally  moral  in  this  commandment  but  a 
seventh  day ;  which  unless  it  be  well  and  warily  explicated,  I 
then  crave  leave  to  concur  thus  fur  with  our  adversaries,  viz., 
(hat  a  solemn  time,  and'  a  day  of  worship,  are  generally  moral  in 
this  command,  but  not  only  moral,  but  that  a  eeventh  diky  also 
which  God  shall  determine  is  gcuerally,  yea,  principally  moral 
also,  in  this  commandment 

T/uM  51.  First,  therefore,  tliat  which  is  moat  generally 
moral  in  this  command  is  that  which  is  called  tempiii  culiia,  or 
the  time  of  worship :  now,  this  time  must  either  be  indeterminate 
time,  which  necessarily  attends  all  acts  of  worship  and  duties  of 
piety,  or  else  determinate  and  solemn  time.  Indeterminate  time 
ia  nut  required  here,  because  to  make  a  special  commandment 
about  such  a  time  would  he  both  needless  and  ridiculous  ;  for  if 
it  be  impossible  that  any  duty  should  be  performed  without  such 
.  time,  then  wherever  that  duty  is  required,  the  time  which  neces- 
sarily attends  it  must  he  supposed  and  enjoined  in  the  some  com- 
mandment. Some  determiuHle  and  solemn  time  is,  therefore, 
herein  gen i? rally,  though  not  only,  commanded. 

Thetit  bi.     It  is  a  scruple  to  »ime  to  know  to  what  command- 

neat  soleaiTi  time  should  be  referred  ;  to  which  the  answer  is 
-that  ihe  same  things  may  be  velen-eil  in  several  respects 
■Bio  seferai  oommandmentii,  »nd  so  may  this.  SoleniD  lime  may 
be  referred  to  ibe  second  comniandmeRt,  where  eolemn  worship 
(in  respect  of  the  means  of  worship)  is  required,  in  some  respect 
to  the  first  commiuidmcnt,  which  requiring  us  to  M^knowledge  God 
r  rovereign  I^rd  and  happiness,  he  would  have  us  there- 
'.»  hare  some  full  scope  of  time  lo  be  serious  and  solemnly 
;  taken  up  in  the  worship  of  him.  But  it  is  referred  lo  ibis  fourth 
:,cpinmiu)dment  as  it  stands  in  a  general  reference  and  relation  lo 
>cTenlh  day's  Sabbath,  wherein  this  gcneml  of  solemn  time  is 
•wallowed  up  and  preserved ;  and,  verily,  if  the  six  days'  labor  be 
required  in  the  fourth  commandment,  in  case  it  be  done  in  refer- 
,«»ce  lo  the  s(;ve nth  day's  rest,  much  more  all  solemn  time  of 
worship,  as  it  stands  in  reference  lo  a  Sabbath  day. 

7%r«u  33.  The  worship  itself  therefore  is  not  required  in 
iAm  commandment,  if  only  the  time  of  worship  be  enjoineS ;  and 
Iff  ignorance  or  prejudice  did  not  bias  and  sway  men's  judgments 
Anoi  the  naked  and  genuine  meaning  of  each  commandment,  it 
VDuld  soon  apjienr  that  [he  whole  won^hip  of  God  itself  is  con- 
tained in  the  ihree  first  commandments,  and  therefore  nothing  ', 
'faft  that  could  possibly  be  enjoined  by  the  fourth,  but  only  lliu 
I  know  a  lime  of  worship  may  in  some  respect  be  called 
'  worship,  but  the  wonibip  itself  in  all  olber  respects  is  not  i-cq«ired 
li  this,  but  in  other  commandments ;  for  if  in  the  first  command* 
nl  we  are  to  have  God  to  be  our  God,  by  love  of  him,  trust  Id 
n,  delight  in  him,  etc.,  (which  nature,  as  it  were,  calls  for,  ifGod 
Jw  our  God,)  then  all  that  which  we  call  natural  worship  is  re- 
{■itrd  hrre ;  and  if  devised  forms  of  worship  be  forbidden  in  the 
neond  commandment,  which  ore  of  human  invention  and  institn- 
w,  ibcn  all  God's  instituted  worship  must  be  commanded  here- 
in ;  and  if  vain  and  irreverent  manner  of  worship  be  forbidden  in 
Uw  third  commaadment,  then  all  common  worship,  as  some  call 
it  or  rather  all  that  holy  and  reverent  manner  of  worship  whioli 
t  owe  to  God,  is  required  in  the  Rame  command;  and  if  all 
fund,  instituted,  and  common  worship,  or  holy  manner  of  wor- 
ip,  be  repaired  in  the  three  first  commands,  I  mai;vel  then  how 
any  worship  (any  further  than  as  a  time  of  worship  may  be 
railed  worship)  can  b«  required  in  thi^  fourth  command.  The 
lime,  therefore,  and  not  the  worship  itself,  is  required  herein ; 
(or  if  any  worship  be  required,  it  is  either  the  whole  worshiji  of 
"    '  e  special  kind  of  worship  ;  if  the  whole  worship,  i' 

^i|kere  sboidd  be  n 
nini  commattdmenls,  bii' 

rship  of  God  required  directly  in  the  tlirc 
the  very  same  which  is  commtiiided  i 

the  fourth  also,  wliich  gross  taulology  is  mosl  absurd  lo  •iitiBKino 
in  tile  sbort  sum  of  these  ten  words  ;  but  if  any  special  kind  of 
woraliip  should  be  required,  and  not  the  whole,  Iben  the  .SAbbxth 
day  is  sanctified  lo  »omc  ono  kind  uf  worship,  rather  ihan  to  the 
exerci.w  of  all  kind  of  worahip,  which  ia  moat  false  and  profane ; 
for  who  will  affirm  that  the  Sabba'h  is  to  be  sanctified,  suppose 
by  that  kind  of  womhip  which  is  public,  and  not  private  al^o ; 
by  exturnal,  and  not  by  intemat  worship  alr^o  :  by  natural  worship 
in  love  and  fear  of  God,  etc.,  and  not  with  instituted  in  the  Ui^e 
of  all  God's  ordinances,  and  that  wilb  all  holy  preparation  and 
reverence  also?^ 

ITietii  54.  The  exercise  of  worship  is  one  thing,  the  worship 
Itself  is  another  j  it  is  most  true  that  the  holy  exercise  of  all 
worship  is  here  required,  but  most  false  that  the  worship  itself  is 
fa.  The  worship  itself  is  required  in  the  three  tir«t  commands, 
but  the  BpecinI  exercise  of  all  this  worship  at  such  a  time  is  re- 
quired in  the  fourth  command :  the  exercise  of  holiness  and  holy 
duties  is  here  required  as  the  end,  and  a  holy  rest  as  a  means 
thereunto  ;  and  in  this  respect  it  is  true  which  Walla;us  observes, 
viz.,  thai  it  is  not  a  bare  and  naked  circumstance  of  time,  but  the 
rent  itielf  from  labor,  and  the  application  of  the  day  to  holy  ujcs, 
which  is  here  enjoined ;  but  doth  it  therefore  follow  that  the 
worship  itself,  and  the  holy  duties  themselves,  are  here  directly 
commanded  ?  which  he  seems  to  mainlain.  No,  verily,  no  more 
than  that  works  of  mercy  in  the  second  table  are  required  in  this 
fourth  command  of  the  first  table,  because  the  exercise  of  mercy 
and  love,  as  well  as  of  piety  and  necessity,  is  required  also  in  this 

"ninit  55.  Ii  is  generally  and  frequently  affirmed  by  tliosa 
who  seek  lo  support  the  morality  of  the  Sabbath,  to  wil,  that  ihe 
exercise  of  worship  and  holy  duties,  al  this  time,  is  required  for 
the  duties'  sake,  as,  at  other  limes,  the  time  is  required  for  the 
lime's  soke ;  by  which  words  iliey  seem  to  make  the  bare  circum- 
stance of  time  Id  be  required  here ;  but  this  assertion  had  need 
be  understood  with  much  candor,  and  the  true  explication  of  it ; 
for  in  some  sense  it  is  most  true  which  our  Saviour  affirms,  that 
man  is  not  made  lor  the  Sabbalh  or  the  time  of  it.  (Mark  ii.  27.) 

Tkait  56.  This  time  therefore  may  be  considered  two  ways : 
1.  Abstractly.  2.  Concretely.  1.  Abstractly,  for  the  bare  cir- 
cumstance of  time,  abslracted  and  stripped  from  all  other  con- 
siderations ;  and  so  it  is  very  absurd  lo  imagine  all  the  holy  duties 
of  the  Sabbath  to  be  for  the  time,  as  if  God  and  all  bis  holy 
worship  should  give  homage  unto,  and  attend  upon,  a  naked, 
empty  circumstance.     Time,  in  thb  respect,  is  rather  for  llio 



■'Worship's  sftke.  2.  Concretely,  as  it  is  wholly  sanriitied  and  set 
BBfiart  for  God,  or  tu  it  ia  a  lioly  lime,  Bet  apart  lor  lioly  rest, 
fo  roan  might  attend  upon  God;  and  in  this  respect  all  liolj 
'S  are  lor  [liis  lime,  because  in  Iliiii  res|)ect  tliey  are  for  God, 
is  all  in  all  in  holy  time.  And  therefore  Wallicus  need  not 
u  upon  search  to  see  whether  the  holy  rest  of  the  day  bo 
ired  in  the  f«cond  or  any  other  cominaod,  for  it  h  not 
ned  by  any,  that  the  naked  circumstance  of  time  is  here  only 
InqnireJ,  without  any  holy  rest;  but  that  a  holy  lime  of  rest  is 
[  fterein  cotamanded,  and  therefore  to  be  referred  to  this  lummand ; 
E  bence  aLw  it  is  most  false  which  some  affirm,  viz.,  "  tliat  the  rest 
l.froni  ordinary  labors  on  this  day.  as  it  is  connected  with  holy 
D/dniice  of  worship,  without  which  they  ean  not  be  performed,  is  as 
laeccssary  now  as  when  the  Jewish  Snbbalh  was  in  being;  but 
f  Bth^rwiee  out  of  these  duties  there  is  no  holy  time  of  rest  com- 
Latanded."  For  such  a  restraint  of  lime  to  holy  duties  as  make« 
I  tte  limu  holy  for  the  duties'  sake,  so  that  no  time  is  holy  but  in 

■  the  performance  of  holy  duties,  and  these  duties  (upon  narrow 

■  •xaminalion)  only  public  duties,  dolli  but  open  a  gup  for  licen- 
I  tiousnesa,  voluptuousness,  sports,  May  poles,  and  dog  markets, 
I  and  snch  like  profaaeness,  out  of  the  lime  of  holy  public  worship, 

what  private  worship  each  man  shall  think  most  meet.  For 
LIB  this  si'nse  holy  duties  are  for  the  time,  because,  the  whole  day 
I  Ving  sanctified,  holy  duties  are  therefore  to  attend,  and  in  this 
I  tespect  are  for  this  time,  and  not  the  time  for  them,  tiz.,  thai 
f  when  the  time  of  the  exercise  of  some  holy  duties  doth  cease,  the 
ime  of  holy  rest  or  holy  time  must  then  cease  also. 

Thrtit  57.     Nor  should  it  seem  strange  that  holy  duties  should 

(lend  holy  lime,  and  be  for  the  sake  of  such  lime ;  because, 

P  although  it  be  true  thai  this  time  is  sanctified,  that  man  may  per- 

I  Jorm  holy  duties,  yet  man  is  now  called  to  the  performance  of 

\-tl\  lioly  duties,  that  he  may  lastly  honor  God  in  all  holiness  in 

lanch  a  special  lime ;  which  time,  if  any  human  power  only  should 

it  axij  holiness  in,  and  it  therefore  should  be  attended  on,  what 

luUl  it  be  else  hut  an  observing  of  days  and  times?  condemned 

J  the  aiM>:«tle,  (Koin.  xiv. ;  Gal.  iv. ;}  which  dirty  ditch  of  ob- 

rving  limes  they  uuawares  fall  into  who  plead  against  a  deter* 

nod  S^haili,  sanctified  of  Go<l,  and  yet  would  have  some  time 

d  day  observed  by  the  ap|>ointment  of  men  ;  for  the  observa- 

n  of  such  days  which  Goil  shall  appoint  can  not  be  condemned 


i-  observing  of  ti 

but  the  observation  of  days,  which 

a  ilinll  think  fit  may  be  quickly  reduced  to  s 
PWp     If  any  ihink  that  there  is  a  peculiar  manner  of 



boliness  and  of  worslilpliig  God  lioi-cin  required,  wliidi  is  not 
requir^tl  in  any  other  conimamlment,  it  may  be  readily  granted, 
if  by  peculiar  manner  of  sancliHcalion  be  meant  a  more  specinl 
degree  and  manner  of  exerdding  the  t^liole  worship  of  God,  in 
respect  of  euch  a  lime ;  but  it  doth  not  therefore  follow,  that  any 
new  kind  of  worship  (which  WalliEus  hence  pleads  for)  is  re- 
quired herein  j/for  lliia  higher  degree  and  special  manner  of 
worship  is  not  the  nubslancc  of  any  new  worship,  it  being  only  a 
peculinr  degree  of  worship,  and  iberefore  varies  not  the  kind. 
And  if  the  three  Urst  eominandmcDts  enjoin  the  worship  itself, 
then  they  do  command  the  highest  measures  and  degrees  also 
severally  i  for  where  any  duty  is  required,  the  highest  degree 
and  extension  of  it  is  also  therewithal  required.  Hence,  there* 
fore,  it  still  follows,  that  this  peculiar  manner  of  exercising  holy 
duties  upon  this  day  is  chiefly  with  reference  and  relation  lo  the 
time  which  God  Iiaih  sanetilied,  that  herein  he  might  be  in  a 
special  manner  worshiped  and  served ;  and,  verily,  Wallceus, 
fore««eing  the  blow,  had  no  other  way  lo  expedite  himself  fi^m 
making'the  three  first  commandments  either  to  be  mere  ciphers. 
or  the  fourth  commfindment  from  laboring  with  a  needless  tau- 
tology, but  by  flying  for  refuge  lo  this  peculiar  maimer  of  holi- 
ness, which  he  thinks  is  required  herein,  and  not  in  any  of  the 
rest :  •  but  wlial  hath  been  said  may  be  sufficient  lo  dear  up  the 
ungroundedness  of  this  mistake. 

77iMtx  50.  A  little  error  is  a  great  breeder,  and  begets  many 
more  ;  and  hence  it  is  that  Wallieus,  nmong  many  others,  that  he 
might  make  the  worship  itself  to  be  required  in  the  fourth  com- 
mandment, disputes  therefore  against  those  who  place  the  insti- 
tuted worship  of  God  directly  under  the  second  commandment, 
which  if  he  could  make  good,  he  had  then  the  fairer  probabilities 
to  show  that  the  worship  itself  was  required  directly  in  the  fourth 
command  i  which  prinfciple,  if  it  was  granted,  would  expose  the 
moralliy  of  the  Sabbath  lo  sorer  blows  and  bruises  than  perhaps 
appears  at  liri't  blush.  It  may  not  therefore  be  amiss,  but  be 
rather  of  special  use  for  the  clearing  up  both  of  the  meaning  and 
morality  of  the  fourth  command,  to  demonstrate,  that  the  insti- 
tuted worship  of  God  (which  Wallieus  calls  cukut  txfemia  et- 
iiiftntmeMala  gidudi  noslTa,per  auditttm  vtrhi  et  taeramtiitorvm 
tffiiin,  etc,)  is  directly  required  in  the  aflmnativG  part  of  the 
second  command. 

G  qaaiio  prsoepio  Hliquem  pcculiureni  ssnclificslioaia  modnm 




60.     Tlie 

s  clearing  up  or  ihia  depends  rauch  upon  a 
rijrhl  and  true  unilcrstanding  of  two  l]iiit;rs  in  [be  second  coni- 
mandnient :  1.  What  ihe  graven  imuge  ami  likened  is.    2.  What 
I  by  those  words,  "Love  me  and  keep  my  comnutnd' 

7%c>i«  61.  Fir«t.  Graven  iraagea,  nner  which  the  wholei 
wurlil  atmoBt  hath  been  enticed,  and  gone  a-whoring  from  the 
true  nror^faip  of  God,  were  worshiped  two  ways:  1.  TertnJna- 
live,  i.  e.,  when  people  terminated  their  worship  upon  the  dumb 
idoU  ihemselves,  as  if  ihey  were  gods,  without  looking  any  far-  I 
iher  to  any  God  more  supreme  and  glorious.  This  is  the  sin  of 
Hiany  of  ihe  ignorant  sort  of  Papists,  by  Bellarrain's  own  confes* 
sioii,  as  also  many  of  Ihe  brutisli  sort  of  the  blind  heathens. 
And  this  kind  of  worship  and  idolatry  is  directly  forbidden,  not  in 
Ihe  second,  but  in  the  first  commandment ;  and  iliat  appears 
d[>on  this  undeniable  ground,  10  wit,  that  if  the  first  coramnnd- 
meat  expressly  enjoins  us  to  have  no  other  God  but  Jehovah,  lo 
tru.<t  in,  pray  lo,  love,  fcur  no  niher  God  but  Jehoviib,  then  fur 
any  to  lutve  and  worship  sueh  images  as  iheir  g«ds  which  are  not 
I  Jnliovah,  ia  directly  forbidden  here.  Hence,  iherelbre,  it  unde- 
■iablj^  fallowsi,  that  by  tiie  making  to  ourselves  a  graven  inuige. 
In  the  second  commandment,  somewhnt  else  must  be  understood 
than  iLe  v[prshiping  of  Jma^s  .lermiofi'vly  as  gods.  2.  Or 
•Iso  they  were  won  biped  relative,  i.  e.,  relatively,  or  in  refer- 
vnce  lo  the  Irue  God,  as  means  and  helps,  in  which,  at  which, 
and  by  which  Ihe  true  God  was  worshiped.  And  thus  the  . 
learned  and  well -instructed  Papists  mainbiin  their  abominable 
worship  of  images,  whether  graven  or  (minted,  crosses,  cruciHxes, 
•tc™  lo  be  guod  and  hiwful ;  for,  siiy  they,  we  do  not  wor* 
dtip,  Dor  are  we  so  senseless  as  to  honor  the  image  or  crucifix 
iiM-1f,  but  only  as  helps  to  devotion,  to  carry  our  hearts  lo  God 
and  Christ,  resembled  by  these  images.  Thus,  also,  the  Jews 
of  old,  liiey  did  never  worship  ihe  images  themselves,  but  God 
in  ihem  and  by  ihem.  They  were  not  grown  so  soon  no  ex- 
tremely sottish  as  lo  ihink  that  the  golden  calf  was  the  true  God 
kimielf  which  brought  them  a  few  weeks  before  out  of  ihe  Innd 
of  Egypt,  but  it  was  a  visible  help  lo  carry  their  hearts  lo  God 
only,  and  therefore  the  feast  was  proclaimed  lo  Jehovah.  (Bx. 
xsxii.  4,  5.)  Micnh's  idolatrous  mother  prafesselh  that  she 
had  dedicated  the  eleven  hundred  shekels  of  silver  lo  Jebovnh  to 
^uha  a  molten  image,  (-ludg.  xvii.  3 ;)  she  was  not  simple 
^■M^M  b  those  confused  and  blind  timed)  to  think  ihut  the 
HN^nM  Jehorab,  nor  did  her  son  Micah  think  so,  and  there- 
^H^WAKh  Dot  say,  Now  1  know  ihal  the  teraphim  will  bl«M 



ine,  but  that  JKliovah  will  now  bless  n 
,for  his   service.     Nay,  verily,  ibe  i 


e,  linving  sel  up  no  image 
neii  luid  best  instructed 
J  Ibe  tieaihcna  did  never  ihiak  llint  the  idols  and  images 
lluimsclvcs  were  God,  but  they  only  worshiped  God  by  them  ; 
.  which  if  any  doubt  of,  Itl  him  but  read  Doctor  Uainolds,  wbo 
by  pregnant  and  most  eminent  proofs  duraon^lnites,  that  neither 
the  Jews  nor  the  lieathens,  in  their  deepest  apostasies,  did  ever 
worship  their  images  any  other  ways  tlian  rclutively,  as  beliM 
and  meima  of  the  worship  of  Ibe  true  God ;  and  hereby  seta 
forth  the  ahominahle  idolatry  of  the  Romish  church,  for  such  a 
worship  of  their  images,  which  even  themselves  condemn  in  the 
idolatrous  Jews  and  heathens,  who  had  as  much  lo  say  for  iheir 
image  worship  as  the  Pupists  have.  Ileiiee,  therefore,  it  fol- 
lows, that  if  tlie  graven  image  in  the  second  commandment  was 
not  worshiped  as  God,  but  ouly  as  a  means  devised  and  invented 
by  man  to  carry  the  ht^ort  unlo  Grud,  then  (by  a  usual  fiyneo 
ducbe  in  every  eoramnnd)  all  human  inventions,  and  iiistitutiona, 
and  devised  means  of  worship,  or  of  ntrrylng  the  lieart  better 
unto  God,  are  forbidden  in  this  commandment;  and  if  all 
human  instiiuiions  and  devised  means  of  worship  be  herein 
direutly  forbidden,  then  certainly  all  divine  instituiions  and  means 
of  worship,  and  consequently  all  God's  instituted  worship,  in 
ministry,  sacraments,  etc,  are  directly  commanded  in  the  affirma- 
tive part  of  this  second  command,  and  consequently  not  in  the 
fourth  command.  And  if  all  urthodox  divines  condemn  the 
Popish  relative  worship  of  images,  as  directly  cross  and  contrary 
to  the  second  command,  I  then  see  no  reason  why  any  should 
question  but  that  all  the  instituted  means  of  worship  (images,  as 
ii  were,  of  God's  own  devising)  should  belong  to  the  atHrmative 
part  of  the  same  command.  The  second  thing  to  be  explained 
in  this  cammutidment  is.  What  is  love  lo  Qod,  and  keeping  of  bis 
commandments,  whiuli  we  reail  of  in  ibe  close  of  the  command- 
ment?/ Love  lo  God  is  liere  op]>osed  to  hatred  of  God,  and 
those  that  love  him  lo  those  that  hale  him.  Now,  this  hatred  is 
not  haling  of  God  at  large,  for  there  is  a  hatred  of  God  in 
every  sin,  (Prov.  1.  29;  viii.  36,)  but  in  particular,  wheu  it 
appears  in  this  particular  sin  of  setting  up  of  images  and  men's/ 
inventions,  forbidden  in  this  commauduieot,  which  therefore  seta 
down  Ibe  proper  punishment  for  this  sin.  So  by  love  of  God  is 
not  meant  love  of  God  at  krge,  (which  is  seen  in  keeping  every 
command,}  but  in  particular,  when  we  love  God  iu  bis  own  ordi- 
Look,  therefore,  as  haired  of  God  in 
setting  up  man's  inventions  and  institutions  (which  superstitio 
persons  think  lo  be  much  love  to  God)  is  here  condemned  in 

THF,  mohalitt  of  the 


e  by  I'oiumaiKlnieiiLt 
Vifan  commHnilnieiils,  {oa 
I  grouiidj^  which  I  ii^t  not 
CaliEDlions  and  ordii 

KkWjiaiive  part  of  ihe  commanclment,  so,  on  the  contrary,  love  lo 

I  God  in  closing  nitb  him  and  seeking  of  him  in  his  own  instilu- 

Ltions,  whether  word  or  saL-nunenta,  etc.,  is  here  enjoined  in  the 

e  part  of  Iliis  command,  and  consequently  not  (us  Wal- 

I  ka»  would  have  il)  in  Ihe  ntlinnative  juirt  of  tlie  fourth  com- 

■luid.  keeping   my  command  me  nl.i  being  set  down  as  a  fruit 

if  this  love,  and  both  together  being  opposed  lo  hatred  of  God. 

"  '  '  1  not  be  meant  in  general  all  .the 

le   imagine   upon    miserable  weak 

mention,)  but  in  special,  God's  in- 

niled  in  special  by  him,  to  which 

i  of  men's  hea<isafl!i_hands    are 

t  «onmoiily  IB  Scripture  opposed,  and  are  therefore  condemned, 

it  commtiuded,  or  because  none  of  his  commnndmenla. 

l(Jer.  vii.  31.     Deut.  xii.  30,  31.     Matt.  xv.  9.)     If,  therefore, 

E  agiun,  God's  institutions  and  commandments  are  liere  enjoined 

I  In  lh»  Kcond  commandment,  they  can  not  be  directly  required  la 

e  fi>urtli  command.     These  Ihinp  being  thus  cleared,  the  objec- 

Nu  of  WalUeue  are  eBsily  answered.     For,  first,  he  Baitli,  "■that. 

Dm  the  negalire  part  of  this  second  commtindtaent  cnn  not 

Bte  gMhered  such  an  affirmative  pttrl  aa  this  in,  vii.,  that  God  will 

■  ke  worshiped  by  the  word  and  sacr&menls."     But  that  this  asf^er- 

fttioo,  thus  barely  propounded,  but  not  proved,  is  false,  appears 

I'ftom  what  hath  been  said  concerning  the  true  meaning  of  the 

tgalive  part  of  this  command.     For  if  buman  inventions,  under 

f  name  of  graven  image,  he  forbidden,  then  divine  institutions, 

l«Brb  Its  word  and  aacramenta  be,  are  here  commanded,  and  from 

1  llmi  nAgmive  any  ordinary  capacity  may  readily  see  what  the 

~         '    !   i^     ile  suiih   again,   secondly,   **  that   if  instituted 

rsbtp  was  cimlained  under  the  affirmative  part  of  the  second 

nt,  then  this  commandment  is  mutable,  because  God 

I  ihud   worshiped   one   way  before  Cliriit,   and  another   way 

M  Christ  1  but  (saith  he)  the  second  commandment  is  moral, 

1  therefore  immutable,  and  therefore  such  mutable  worship 

n  not  bu  ei\joinc<i  herein."     But  we  have  formerly  shown  thai, 

_h  tliit  commandment  be  moral  and  immutable  in  respect 

f  ttscK  yet  in  re»pect  of  the  application  of  it  to  this  or  that 

"leet  or  thing  may  be  in  that  respect  mulnblc 

c  it  is  an  humatable  taw  that  God  must  be  worshiped  with  his 

N  wonthip,  such  as  he  shall  institute,  (and  this  is  the  sum  of 

gad oommand moot  itself;)  yet  the  things  inslituied  (wherc- 

•  b  only  an  application  of  the  command)  may  be  mutable.: 

iroutniBandmunt  duih  not  immutably  bind  lo  the  obser* 

I  W  that  particular  iniuiuted  worship  oul^',  bi(t  Kj 


observe  GcmI's  inslituted  worship,  and  U>  nttend  his  appointments, 
which  13  the  only  moral  law  and  rule  in  the  atfirn]»iive  part  of 
this  command.  He  thirdly  objects,  **  that  the  worshiping  of 
God  in  word  and  sacraments,  etc.,  is  never  opposed  in  all  lliu 

I  Scripture  to  the  Horshiping  of  images."  But  tliis  is  false  ;  for 
God's  institutions  (of  wliich  word  and  ^ncramentB  ore  a  pan)  are 
frequently  opposed  to  human  inventions,  the  worship  appointed 
by  God  to  the  worship  devised  by  man.  Images  of  God's  deris' 
ing  ore  oft  opposed  to  imdges  of  men's  own  inventing  ;  [be  voice 
of  God,  which  was  only  heard  with  ibe  ear-ia  opposed  to  an 
image  or  similitude  which  might  be  seen.  (Dent.  iv.  12.)  A 
graven  image,  a  teacher  of  lies,  is  opposed  lo  ibe  Lord's  teaching 
of  truth,  and  also  to  his  presence  in  liis  temple,  which  was  tlie 
seat  of  instituted  worship.  (Hub.  ii.  18-20.)  The  worship  of 
images  which  God  would  liave  abolished  b  opposed  to  the  wor- 
ship of  God  by  sacrifices  and  ceremonies,  in  the  place  which 
G(hI  should  cboose,  (Dcut.  xii.  1-20;)  but  yet  he  tells  us, 
"  that  to  WDi^hip  God  in  images,  and  lo  worship  him  in  spirit 
and  truth,"  (which  is  inward  worship.)  "are  opposite;  as  also  the 
lilling  up  of  pure  hands  in  every  place."  (John  iv.  26.  1  Tim. 
ii.  8.)  He  tells  us  also,  that  acknowledging  of  God  in  bia  immen- 
eity  and  infinite  majesty  are  op{X)sed  to  image  worship.  (Rom.  i. 
20-22.  Is.  xl.  22.)  Be  it  so.  But  will  it  therefore  follow,  that 
to  worship  God  according  to  his  own  institutions  is  not  to  worship 
him  in  spirit  and  in  truth  ?  Is  it  rather  a  carnal  than  a  spirit- 
_  ual  worship,  to  attend  on  God  in  word  and  sacraments?  May 
we  not  lift  up  pure  hands  in  the  usu  of  God's  own  institutions  ? 
Is  not  God's  immensity  and  m^esty  acknowledged  and  ^een  in 
the  use  of  his  own  ordinances,  >ts  well  as  creatures  and  provi- 
dences ?  I  confess  the  blinder  sort  of  heathens  might  worship 
stocks,  and  stones,  and  images  of  creeping  things,  and  four-fooled 
beasts,  in  ihe  place  of  God  himself,  termiuaiively,  and  God 
might  account  uf  all  their  image  worship  as  such,  ibougb  used 
relatively  ;  and  hence  the  opposition  may  well  be  made  between 
wor&hipiug  them  as  God,  and  an  infinite  God ;  and  this  worship  (as 
was  said)  falls  then  under  the  iirst  commandment :  but  assuredly 
this  image  worship  which  the  apostle  condemns,  (Etom.  i.  21,  23,) 
in  debasing  the  inliriile  majesty,  and  liiuiting  it  to  this  and  Iliat 
iimige  wherein  they  did  worship  it,  is  forbidden  (being  only  rela- 
tive worship)  in  the  second  command.  J-'or  1  think  the  aposile 
(in  Rom.  i.)  hath  an  eye  principally  al  the  most  lascivious  idola- 
ters in  the  world,  viz.,  the  I'^gyptians,  among  whom  principally 
we  read  of  those  images  of  creeping  things  and  four-foolMl 
j,  in  their  hieroglyphics :  and  ^et  wb  know  that  all  tliat  Uus 



«otshi]i  dill  get  out  sometliing  or' other  of  the  Deity,  which  thcre- 
'n  (hdJ  mi  relatively)  Iliey  did  warship.  But  I  mast  not  enter 
iitu  the  discourse  of  these  things  here ;  suHicient  is  said  to  clear 
1(1  Ibis  jH>inl.  vii.,  thut  God's  institmed  worship  fulb  directly  ' 
nnder  the  »ecoDd,  not  fourth  eominand. 

7%e»u  6i.  It  is  true  that  llie  exercise  of  pnWic  worship  of 
tnnny  U^ther  is  to  be  a.t  this  time  upon  tlie  Sabbath ;  but  doth 
h  fottuw  that  therefore  this  public  wori^hip  itself  falls  directly 
under  this  command  ?  For  if  public  assemblies  be  (as  some 
think)  a  part  of  natural  worship,  so  as  that  the  light  of  nature 
directs  all  men  dwelling  together,  as  creature^  to  worship  God  . 
logeiher  publicly  as  Creator,  then  thb  worship  falls  directly 
nikder  the  first  (not  fourth)  commattdment,  where  natural  wor- 
■hip  is  directly  commnnded ;  but  if  public  assemblies  be  consid- 
ered as  distinct  churches  politically  united  and  combined,  publicly 
to  worahip  God,  then  such  churches,  considered  thus  as  political, 
not  mystical  assemblies,  do  fall  directly  under  the  second  com- 
numd,  as  parts  of  instituted  worship  ;  for  as  all  devised  forms  of 
chllrclle!^  whether  diocesan,  provincial,  national,  universal,  (being 
the  inventions  of  man  to  further  ilie  worship  of  God,)  are  con- 
demned directly  in  the  second  command,  so  all  sucli  churches  as 
are  framed  into  a  spiritual  polity,  aAer  the  fashion  and  pattern 
of  the  word  and  primitive  institution,  arc  (with  leave  of  Erastus 
and  his  disciplen)  enjoined  in  the  same  commandment,  and  there- 
fore not  in  the  fourth.  Gomarus  and  Master  Primrose,  therefore, 
much  mistake  the  mark  and  scope  of  the  fourtli  command- 
ment, who  affirm,  "that  as,  in  the  three  first  commandments, 
<'>od  ordaiaed  the  inward  and  outward  service,  which  be  will 
have  every  particular  man  to  yield  to  him  in  private  and  sever- 
ally from  the  society  of  men  every  day,  so  in  the  fourth  com- 
maulment  be  enjoineth  a  service  common  and  public,  which  all 
tnuat  yield  together  unto  him,  forbearing  in  the  mean  while  all 
othrr  business."  But  why  should  they  think  that  public  worship 
u>  more  requited  here  than  private?  Will  ihcy  say  that  tlie 
Sabbalh  is  not  to  be  sanctilietl  by  private  and  inward  worship,  ns 
well  as  by  public  and  external  worship  ?  Are  not  private  pre]i- 
Kratioo,  meditation,  secret  prayer,  and  converae  with  God,  re- 
quired upon  this  day.  as  well  as  public  prayer  and  hearing  the 
word  ?  If  thej'  say  that  these  are  required  indeed,  but  it  is  in 
referrace  to  the  public,  and  for  the  public  worship's  sake,  it  may 
be  then  as  easily  replied,  ttint  the  public  worship  is  also  for  tlic 
aake  of  the  private,  that  each  man  secretly  and  privately  might 
,  BUM  and  fved  upon  the  guoil  of  public  helps ;  they  are  iDUlUHlly 
.   faelpful  one  to  another,  anil   therefore   are  appointed  one  for 


another,  utilcss  any  will  ihink  timi  no  more 
upoD  this  day  iban  while  puhlic  wor^bip  ki 
hope  shall  nppcur  Id  be  a  piece  of  pi'ofe.^sed  prolan 
metui  whilu,  louk,  as  ihvy  bave  no  reason  lu  think  Ihal  private 
worship  is  required  in  this  cuminiuid,  bccauiie  the  exerciiie  of 
private  ivori^hip  is  at  this  time  required,  so  they  have  an  little 
reason  to  ihink  that  the  public  worship  itself  is  lierein  eDJoined, 
becaiiso  the  exercise  of  it  is  to  be  also  at  suth  a  time.  It  is 
therefore  the  time,  not  the  wortihip  itself,  either  public  or  pri- 
xaie,  which  is  here  direelly  comraandeil ;  although  it  be  true, 
that  both  of  ihem  ure  lierelu  indirectly  required,  *iz^  in  relation 
lu  the  lime. 

Thesii  Oa.  ir,  therefore,  the  moral  worship  ilself,  whether  pub- 
lic, external,  or  private,  be  not  directly  required  in  this  fourth 
command,  much  less  is  the  whole  ceremonial  worship  here  en- 
joined, as  Mitster  Primrose  maintains  ;  for  the  whole  ceremonial 
worship,  both  in  sacrifice,  ceremonies,  types,  etc.,  was  signiticanl, 
and  were,  as  I  may  so  say,  God's  images,  or  media  cultui,  means 
of  worship,  by  carrying  the  mind  and  heart  to  God,  by  their 
special  significations,  and  thcrelbre  were  instituted  worship,  and 
therefore  directly  contained  under  the  second,  and  therefore  not 
under  the  fuunh  cominaud :  *'  And  if  there  be  but  nine  com- 
mandments whieh  are  moral,  and  Ibis  one  (by  his  reckoning)  is 
to  be  ceremonial,  and  the  head  of  nil  ceremonials,  and  that  lliere- 
fore  unto  it  all  ceremonial  worship  is  to  appertain,"  then  thti 
observation  of  a  Sabbath  is  the  greatest  ceremony,  according  as 
we  see  in  all  other  commandments,  the  lesser  sins  are  condemned 
under  the  grosser,  as  anger  under  murder,  and  lust  under  adul- 
tery ;  and  inferior  duties  under  the  chief  and  principal,  as  hon- 
oring the  aged  and  masters,  etc.,  under  honoring  of  parents  ;  and 
so  if  all  ceremonials  are  referred  to  this,  then  the  &tbbath  is  the 
grossest  and  greatest  ceremony  one  of  them  i  and  if  so,  then  it 
is  n  greater  sin  Id  sanctify  a  8:itibaih,  at  any  time,  than  to  observe 
new  moons  and  other  festivals,  which  are  less  ceremonial,  and  are 
therefore  wholly  cashiered,  because  ceremonial  i  and  if  so,  why 
ibeu  doth  Master  Primrose  telL  us  "that  the  Sabbath  is  moral  . 
tor  substance,  principal  scope  and  end,  and  that  it  is  unm«ct  for 
us  lo  observe  fewer  days  than  the  Jews,  in  respect  of  weekly 
Sabbaths"?  Why  is  not  the  name  and  memorial  of  the  Sabbath 
abandoned  wholly  and  utterly  accursed  from  aS  Ibu  face  of  the 
earth,  as  well  as  new  moons  and  other  Jewish  festivals,  which 
upon  his  principles  are  leas  ceremonial  than  the  weekly  Sabbath? 
I  It  may  be  an  audacious  Familisl,  whose  conscience  is  grown  iron, 
and  whose  brow  is  brass,  through  a  conceit  of  his  immunity  Irom, 


.  rtspcct  of,  any  ihing  which  lialh  the 
■  works  upon  ii,  may  abandon  all  Sab- 
mcNins  ei]ually :  but  those  J 
I  hope  any  pious  mind  else, 

that  when  Ihe  Lord  commands  us 

nil- I 

I  mnd  Chri:itiai)  liberty  ii 

I   BUperscription  of  law  o 

ktlliB  together  with  nen 

~  luppoee,  dare  not,  noi 

I  era  but  this  one  thing, ' 

I  Kmember  to  keep  the  Sabbttth  boly,  lie  must  then  ^according  t( 

I  this  interpretation)  command  us  that,  above  all  other  coinmand- 

■entfi,  ne  obsen-e   his  ceremonial  worship,  (which   they  say  is 

here  enjoined.)  rather  than  his  moral  worship,  wliieh  they  ao- 

I  knowledge  to  be  enjoined  in  all  the  other  nine  commandments, 

il  the  gate  of  none  oF  which  commands  is  written  this  word 

mnrmifr ;    which  undoubtedly  implies  a  special  attendance  to 

I   be  shown  unto  this,  above  any  other ;  for  as  we  shall  show,  kuep 

[  this  keep  all;  break  this,  slight  this,  slight  all ;  and  therefore  no 

wonder  if  no  other  eommrtnd  hath  this  word  remembrr  writ 

I   Bpoa  the  portal  of  it,  which  word  of  fence  denotes  special  afiec- 

tinn  and  action,  in  the  Hebrew  language :  but  I  suppose  it  may 

Mrike  the  hardest  brow  and  heart  with  terror  and  horror  to  go 

about  to  aillx  and  impute  such  a  meaning  to  this  commandment, 

'    VK„  that  principally  above  all  other  duties  we  reioeraber  to  ob- 

e  those  things  which  are  cercmotiial ;  for  although  the  obser- 

'  Tntion  of  ceremonies  be  urged  and  re<iuired  of  God,  as  Master 

t   Primrot^e    truly   observes    from   Fs.  cxviii.  27  ;  Jer.   xvii.   26 ; 

[  Joel  six.  13 ;  Mai.  i.  7,  8,  10,  13.  U,  yet  that  God  should  re- 

I  quire  and  urge  the  observaUon  of  these  above  any  other  worship, 

\  ia  evidently  cross  to  reason,  and  expressly  cross  to  Scripture. 

|,(Is.  i.  11-16;  lxvi.3.      Ps.  I.  13.    Jer.  vi.  20.     Amos  iii.  21. 

I  Jliah  vi.  7.)    To  remember  therefore  to  keep  the  Sabbath  is  not 

\  to  rmneinber  to  observe  ceremonial  duties. 

71«m  64.  Nor  should  it  seem  strange  that  Jewish  holy  days 
I  «r«  not  here  enjoined,  where  a  holy  time,  a  Sabbath  day,  is 
I  OMntnandrNl ;  for  those  Jewish  holy  days  were  principally  insti- 
I  tdtvd  (as  Wollains  well  observes)  for  signitication  uf  Christ  and 
I  \v  hunviaX*,  (as  may  appear  from  1  Cor.  v.  7  ;  Luke  iv.  I'J  ;  tieb. 

J  and  therefore,  being  significant,  were  parts  of  instituted 
lip,  belonging  to  the  second,  not  fourth  command,  but  the 
h  day  (as  shall  be  shown)  is  in  its  original  institution  atid 
Winn  of  another  nature,  and  not  signiticant ;  yet  this  may 
I  b«  gnuitrd,  that  ceremonial  holy  days  may  be  referred  to  the 
^  tburtli   command,  as   appendices   of  it ;  and  if  Calvin,  Urain, 
olhers  aim  nt  no  more,  it  may  be  granted,  but  it 
r  from  hence   that  they  therefore  belong  to  Uio 
tnd  indirectly,  and  directly  to  the  fourth,  (which 
e  contends  for,)  but  rather  directly  to  the  second, 


and  redactivelj  and  indirectly  ns  npiiendices  lo  llie  luurtlij 
whiuh  appendicee,  as  Ihey  may  be  put  lo,  so  they  niay  be  taken 
off  again,  the  moral  couimandment  remaining  entire :  even  na 
we  know  Calvin  refers  many  ceremonial  duties  as  appendices  lo 
such  commoads,  concerning  the  morality  of  nhicli  Master  Prim- 
rose doubts  not ;  and  therefore  for  him  to  tliink  that  the  Sabbatb 
comprehends  all  Jewish  festival  days  upon  ibis  ground,  vii:.,  be- 
cause the  Sabbath  is  joined  with  and  put  in  among  the  reckon- 
ing of  Buch  festivals,  (Lev.  xxiii.  j  Is.  i.  13,  14,)  hath  no  more 
force  in  it,  than  by  retorting  the  argument,  and  upon  ibe  like 
ground  prove  it  to  be  moral,  because  it  is  joined  nith  moral 
commandments,  as  honoring  of  parents  (Lev.  xix.  3)  and 
prayer,  (Is.  i.  19,)  and  by  his  own  confession  with  the  other  nine, 
which  are  all  of  them  moral  also. 

TTient  G5,  Secondly,  not  only  a  solemn  time,  bat  more  par- 
ticularly a  solemn  day,  a  whole  day  of  worship,  is  here  also  re- 
quired by  virtue  of  this  fourth  command ;  and  the  Lord  gives  us 
good  reason  for  it,  that  if  he  gives  us  many  whole  days  for  our 
own  work,  then,  not  some  part  of  a  day,  but  a  day,  a  whole  day, 
according  to  the  reason  and  espress  words  of  the  commandment, 
should  be  marked  out  and  set  apart  for  his  work  and  service.  If 
that  jilacB,  Is.  Ivi,  6,  7.  will  not  demonstrate  a  seventh  day's  Sab- 
bitth  under  the  New  Testament,  yet  it  sufiiuently  and  fully 
clears  the  point  in  hand,  viz^  that  a  Sabbath  day  is  to  be  observed 
by  the  sons  of  the  stranger  or  Gentiles,  who  are  called  strangers  to 
the  commonwealth  of  Israel,  (Eph.  ii.  12;)  and  indeed  Wallmus 
freely  confesse til  and  proveth,  that  a  whole  day  ia  here  required; 
and  if  a  whole  day,  I  hope  none  will  think  that  the  time  out  of 
public  assemblies  is  common  and  profane,  if  a  whole  day  be 
holy ;  and  therefore  Master  Primrose  tells  us  that  the  Gentiles, 
having  no  other  law  but  the  light  of  nature,  have  appointed  set 
days  for  the  exercise  of  iheir  religion,  and  that  as  the  Jews  had 
their  set  days,  (which  we  know  were  whole  days,)  wi  should  Chris- 
tians have  theirs  for  their  public  assemblies  under  the  gospel ; 
which  I  hope  must  be  therefore  whole  days  also :  it  is  also  consid- 
erable that  if  the  three  first  commandments  requiring  God's  wor- 
ship do  consequently  require  some  time  for  that  worship,  (as 
being  a  necessary  adjunct  to  all  actions,  whether  moral  or  civil, 
and  without  which  tliey  can  not  be  performed,)  then  the  fourth 
command  must  require  somewhat  more  parucularly  than  a  time  of 
worship  :  ond  therefore  ibey  that  place  the  morality  of  the  fourth 
command  in  requiring  only  a  lime  of  worship  (because,  say  ihey, 
a  time  of  woraliip  is  necessary)  may,  upon  this  ground,  wholly 
and  iKirfectly  abolish  (he  fourth  command  as  sujierAuous  and 

:    OF   THif  R 


I  needless,  bei^ause  ^uch  a  time  of  worsLip  is  required  in  sll  athct 

[  comniandmeiits   neFessarily.     Thcj  mny  also  imngine  as  great 

[  a  morality  in  the  comniond  of  buiUIing  the  temple  the  place  of 

I  vorihip,  because  a  place  of  worship  is  a  necessary  as  well  as  tf 

I  tfnie:  itis  not,  therefore,  atime,  butsuulia  [imeasis  iircserved  iqa 

I  day.  even  in  a  whole  day,  for  worship,  which  is  here  commanded. 

t       nesit  66.     The  wise  God  could  liavo  appointed  some  part  oT 

[  "erery  day  to  be  kept  hoty,  rather  than  a  whole  day  togelher ; 

I  Ihic  im  wisdom  saw  this  proportion  of  time  every  day  lo  be  more 

I   onmeet,  in  respect  of  man's  daSIy  cumbers,  which  do  so  eojily    - 

^tangle  man's  thoughts  and  afIeclionE>.  so  as  within  some  amall 

piece  of  a  day  he  can  not  ordinarily  nor  easily  recover  and  un- 

»o«e  him^lf  to  find  the  end  of  a  Sabbath  scrviceJ  which  is  most  | 

fweel  and  full  rest  in  the  bosom  of  his  God,  as  he  may  within 

Ae  compass  of  a  whole  day  set   apart   for  that  end :    or  aup- 

L  fofc  he  could  do  so  in  a  piece  and  part  of  a  day,  yet  God's  name 

rwonlit  lose  by  it,  if  be  should  not  have  the  honor  of  some  solemn 

[  imj.  which  we  see  do  serve  to  advance  the  names  of  idol  gods, 

I  md  men  on  earth ;  it  is  meet  and  just  (bat  God's  name  should 

be  magnified  by  us  commonly  every  day,  by  setting  apart  some 

thno  which  we  may  well  spare  (as  whet  to  the  scythe)  out  of  our 

I  atllin^,  for  God,  and  this  doth  honor  him,  but  a  day  much  more. 

I        Tittit  67.     They,  therefore,  who  maintain  that  a  seventh  day 

it  not  moral,  because  it  is  bat  a  cireumslance  of  time,  may  an 

I  well  abolish  time  lo  be  moral,  or  any  day  to  be  moral,  because  a 

w  4ay  (let  it  fall  onl  when  it  will)  is  but  a  cireumslance  of  time ; 

1  which  notwithstanding  they  account  to  be  moral  in  this  com- 

I  nand:  bat  we  know  that  much  morality  lies  in  circumstances,  and 

why  n  day  sanctified  may  not  be  as  much  moral  as  a  duty,  I  yet 

K  not. 

TSrtit  CS.     The  Familisis  and  Antinomians  of  late,  like 

I  Ifanicbees  of  old,  do  make  all  days  equally  holy  under  the  gos- 

I  ^1.  and  none  to  be  observed  more  than  another  by  virtue  of  any 

|-  eommsnd  of  God,  unless  it  be  from  some  command  of  roan  lo 

r  which  the  ontward  roan  they  think  should  not  slick  to  oonfbrm, 

I  *r  utileu  it  be  pro  re  nala.  or  upon  several  occasions,  which  spe- 

I  «ial  occasions  are  only  to  give  the  alamms  for  chureh  meetings  and 

e  Christian  assemblies  —  an  audacious  assertion,  cross  to  the 

fht  of  nature  nmong  the  blind   heathens,  who   have   uni- 

f  idlowcd  the  Deily  whom  they  ignorantly  worshiped  the 

f  of  some  solemn  duties ;   cross  to  the  verdict  of  Popish 

and    pratatisls,    whose  slomuchs   never  stood   much 

f  ^bbalh  at  all ;  cross  lo  the  scope  of  the  law  of  th& 

,  if  it  bath   any  general  morality,  (not  denied 






scarce  to  any  of  Moses'  judiciuls.)  surely  one  nuuld  think  it 
fihoulil  lie  in  the  observatioa  of  some  day  or  days,  though  not  in 
a  seventh  day,  for  which  now  we  do  not  contend  ;  cross  also  to  the 

.appointmenl  of  the  gospel,  foretold  by  Isaiah  and  Ezekiel,  (Is. 

Jlvi.  4.  6  ;  Ezeli.  xliii.  27^  made  mention  of  by  our  Saviour  to  con- 

^tinuelong  after  the  abolisningof  all  ceremonies  by  liis  death,  (MatL 
xxiv.  20,)  who  therefore  bids  them  pray,  that  their  flight  may 
not  be  in  the  winter,  nor  on  the  Sabhath  day,  which,  whether  it . 
be  the  Jewish  or  Christian  Sabbath,  I  dispute  not ;  only  this  is 
evident,  that  he  hath  an  eye  to  some  special  set  day,  and  which 
was  lastly  ordained  by  Christ,  and  observed  in  the  primitive 
'  j^rcbes,  commonly  called  the  Lord's  day,  as  shall  be  shown  in 
:  place,  and  /khich  notion,  under  pretense  of  more  Epirilual- 
s,  in  making  every  day  a  Sabbath,  (which  is  utterly  unlawful 
and  impossible,  unless  it  bo  lawful  to  neglect  our  own  work  all 
the  week  long,  and  without  which  there  can  be  no  true  Sabbath,) 
dolh  really  undermine  the  true  Sabbath,  in  8{>ecial  set  days;  and 
look,  as  to  make  every  man  u  king  und  judge  in  a  Christian  com- 
monwealth would  be  the  introduction  of  confusion,  and  uonse- 
(juently  the  destruction  of  a  civil  government,  so  to  crown  every 
day  with  equal  honor  unto  God's  set  days  and  Sabbaths  which  he 
bath  anointed  and  exalted  above  the  rest,  this  anarchy  and  con- 
fusion of  days  doth  utterly  subvert  the  true  Sabbaih ;  to  make 

•  every  day  n  Sabbath  is  a   real  debasing  and  dethroning  of 

iGod's  Sabbath. 

^^'hesit  69.  It  is  true  that  every  day,  considered,  materially  and 
physically,  as  a  day,  is  etjually  holy  i  but  this  is  no  argument  to 
prove  that  therefore  every  day  is  morally  and  theologically 
holy  i  for  those  things  which  of  themselves  are  common  may  by 
divine  appointment  superadded  to  them  become  holy  (witness  the 
dedicated  things  of  the  lempk,)  and  so  it  ia  in  days  and  times ; 
under  the  Old  Testament  we  see  some  days  were  more  holy  by 
God's  appointment  than  others,  and  yet  all  days  then  were  ma- 
terially und  alike  holy. 

Thetis  70.  It  is  true  that,  under  the  New  Testament,  all 
places  (in  a  safe  sense)  are  equally  holy  ;  but  it  doth  not  follow 
from  hence  (as  our  adverEaries  would  infer)  that  therefore  all 
times  are  so ;  and  Wallaius  himself  confesseth  the  a:^ument  to 
be  invalid ;  for  it  was  not  ea^  nor  meet,  but  very  dissonant 
from  divine  and  heavenly  wisdom,  to  appoint  in  his  word  all  par- 
ticular places  where  his  people  should  meet,  their  meetings  being 
to  he  in  so  many  thousand  several  countries,  and  various  situations, 
which  places  are  indeed  for  their  general  nature  commanded  and 
necessary,  but  in  respect  of  application  to  circumstances  of  this 
_juid  that  place  and  country,  the  variation  of  them  is  almost 

['  enclltfs.*.  and  therefore  very  incongruoufi  and  useless  lo  Mil  them 
'  down  in  the  wordi  but  it  was  not  so  in  respei-i  of  Bolemn  time, 
or  a  solemn  day  of  worshi]),  for  herein  the  Lord  might  ensily 
appoint  a  particulur  day  to  be  observed,  nraurding  to  the  rising 
ftnd  Netting  of  the  sun  proportion  ably  throughout  all  the  world ; 
Kitd  the  Scripture  hath  expressly  foretold  in  respect  of  phice, 
that  neither  in  Jerusalem,  Juijea,  nor  Samnria,  but  thai  in  every 
place  incense  should  be  offered  up  to  God,  (Mai.  i.  II;)  but  it 
hath  not  80  »poken,  but  mther  the  contrary,  in  respect  of  lime,  x 
n*(i(  71.  Nor  is  any  time  momlty  holy,  in  thiR  sense,  viz., 
instni mentally  holy,  or  as  an  instrument  and  means  by  which 
God  will  convey  any  spiritual  and  supernatural  grace,  (as  iiacra- 
nenia  now  do,  and  »acriliccs  of  old  did ;)  but  being  sanctified  of 
God,  they  are  holy  seasons,  in  which  God  is  pleased  to  meet  and 
bleM  his  people,  rather  than  at  other  times  and  days  of  our  own 
devising,  or  of  more  common  use ;  reserving  only  the  Lord's 
prerogative  to  himself,  to  work  at  other  times  also  more  or  less, 
u  he  aees  meet.  Indeed,  it  is  true  that  by  our  improvement  of 
oor  lime,  and  of  such  times,  the  Lord  sweetly  conveys  him»etf  to 
OS,  yet  still  it  is  not  by  time  itself,  nor  by  the  day  itself;  but  as  he 
(»nv«ys  himself  to  us  by  holy  things,  and  at  holy  places,  (as  the 
mtk  and  temple,)  so  in  holy  timee. 

7%Mf(  72.  There  are,  indeed,  sundry  scriptures,  which,  to 
oae  wlio  is  willing  to  have  all  days  equal,  may  carry  a  great 
breadth,  and  make  a  specious  show  ;  and  I  ingenuously  confess 
that,  tipon  a  rigidum  txnmm  of  them,  they  are  more  weighty  and 
heavy  than  the  disputers  in  this  controversy  usually  fee)  them, 
and  therefore  lliey  do  more  lightly  cast  them  by  and  pass  them 
ever;  and  it  is  lo  he  wished,  that  those  who  do  not  think  that  all 
_  !  are  equal,  yet  will  not  acknowledge  a  seventh  day  to  be 
moral,  had  not  put  wen[ions  unawares  into  the  hands  of  othert, 
vircnglhcning  them  thereby  to  destroy  the  morality  of  any  day, 
and  CO  to  lay  nil  days  level;  for/l  scarce  know  an  argument  or 
•cripiore  allegerl.  by  any  German  writer,  against  the  morality 
«f  a  K'Tpnih  day,  but  It  strikes  directly  against  the  morality  of 
I   any  day,  which  yet  they  acknowledge  to  be  moral,  f  , 

TSmm  73.     The  fairest  color  and  strongest  fifrce  from  GalT 
r.  10,  and  C<d.  ii.  16,  lies  in  the  gradation  which  some  supposu 
L  lo  be  ini4.-nded  in  both  those  places.     "  ¥o  observe  "  (saith  the 
Mwnle)  "days,  and  months,  and  times,  and  years."  (Gal.  iv.  10.) 
"  nvm  the  apostle  seems  to  ascend  from  the  lesser  to  the  greater, 
1  day*  (which  are  less  than  mouths,  nnd  therefore  weekly 
baili  days)  to  months,  from  months,  or  new  moons,  to  timtn, 
sh  are  higher  than  months,  nud  by  which  is  meant  iheir  an- 


jiubI  feasts  and  faais,  orJered  according  lo  llie  «oiyei,  or  filtf  bI  pcb- 
Gons  of  the  year ;  uod  from  limes  lie  ascends  y^et  hij^lier  lo  yenra, 
yiz.,  their  sabbatical  jenrs,  because  they  were  c«lebraled  oiice  in 
tamy  years,  sometimes  seven,  aotoetimes  fifty  years  j/hy  whieh 
.gradation  it  seemii  evident  that  the  observation  uf  dnys,  which 
are  lesa  than  mooths,  and  tiierefore  of  weekly  SttbbKths,  ora 
hereby  condemned.  The  like  grndation  is  urged  from  Col.  ii. 
16,  where  the  a|>Mtle  seems  to  descend  from  condemning  the 
greater  lo  the  condemnation  of  ibe  lesser :  "  Let  do  man  judge 
you"  (saith  the  aposUeJ  "  in  respect  of  a  holy  day,  new  moon, 
or  Sabbath  days."  There  holy  days  seem  lo  be  their  annual  or 
eabhaticnl  days,  their  new  moona  are  less  than  then),  beLag  e*  ery 
month;  and  therefore  by  Sabbath  days  (they  infer)  must  needs 
be  meant  the  weekly  ^bbath^,  lese  iban  new  moons.  Indeed, 
.some  understand  by  days  and  times  (in  Gal.  iv.)  heathenish 
days;  but  he  speaking  of  such  days  as  are  beggarly  rudiments, 
under  which  not  the  lieatbens,  but  the  children  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment were  in  bondage,  (ver.  iii.,)  he  must  therefore  sjieuk  not  n£ 
lieatheiiiKb  but  of  Jewish  days.  I  know  also  that  some  understaod 
that  of  Col.  ii.  16  to  be  meant  of  Jewish  and  ceremooial  Sahbatiiii, 
which   were  aimual ;  but  this   the  apostle's  gradation  seems  to 

T/teiit  74.  To  both  these  places,  therefore,  a  threefold  an- 
swer may  be  given.  Fii-st,  admit  the  gradation  in  them  both  ;  yet 
by  days  (Gal.  iv  10)  is  not  necessarily  meant  all  weekly  Sab- 
jtiath  days,  for  there  were  oUier  days  ceremonial  which  ibe  Jews 
observed,  and  wtiich  the  Jewish  teachers  urged,  besides  the  Sab- 
bath ;  to  instance  only  in  circmncision,  which  they  sealonsly 
pressed,  (Gal.  v.  S.)  which  we  know  was  limited  unto  the  eightji 
day.  and  whicli  ihey  might  urge  as  well  as  circumcision  itself. 
However,  look,  as  the  apostle  when  he  condemns  them  for  ob- 
serving times,  xaii/oi,  which  signifies  fit  reasons,  he  doih  not 
iberein  condemn  them  for  observing  all  lit  aeajjous,  (for  then  we 
most  not  pray  nor  hear  the  word  in  fit  seasons,)  but  he  condemns 
the  Jewish  ceremonial  times  and  seasons  j  so  ^^'hen  he  condemns 
(he  observation  of  days,  the  apostle  doth  not  condemn  Ihe  obser- 
VHtion  of  all  days,  (for  then  days  of  fasting  an4  feasting  must  be 
pondemned,  as  well  as  days  of  resting  under  the  New  Testament,) 
but  the  observiuion  of  ceremonial  days,  which  the  Jews  observed, 
and  fabe  tcftchers  urged ;  and  indeed  the  apostle  speaks  of  such 
roays  as  were  beggarly  elements  and  rudiments./  Kow,  James 
'speaking  of  tlie  moral  law,  which  comprehends  Sabbath  days,  he 
do|h  not  call  it  a  beggarly  luw,  but  a  royal  law,  (James  ii.  8, 1  ^  i) 
nor  doth  he  make  subjection  thereunto  lo  be  the  bondage  of 

■  THE    UOBALITV    Of   T 

I  mrantft,  (as  thai  was.  Gal.  iv.  0.)  but  the  liberty  of  children,  and  1 
ft  ^refure  culle'l  a  royal  law  of  liberty.  ^     I 

I  Sccoinlly,  suppose  the  n-cekly  Sabbalh  be  liere  comprehended 
■'■nder  day?,  a»  also  that  by  Sabbalh  is  meant  weekly  Sabbaths, 
I  (CoL  ii.  1 G ;)  yet  hereby  can  not  be  mennt  ihe  Christian  Sabbath, 

■  but  the  Jewish  Sabbath  ;  for  the  apos^lle  condemns  that  Sabbalh 
ftand  those  Sabbath  days  which  the  Jewish  teachers  pleaded  for 

■  amoag  the  Colossians/  Now,  ihey  never  pleaded  for  the  obaerva- 
flianirf  the  Christian  Subbnth,  but  were  zealuus  and  strong  proctors 
I  Jbr  thai  particul&r  seventh  day  from  the  creation,  which  tiie  Jews, 
w  Ibeir  forefathers,  for  many  years  before  observed,  and  for  the  oh- 
w  •erratiim  of  which  some  among  us  of  lale  begin  to  struggle  as  at 
I  this  day.  Now,  as  was  said,  admit  Ihe  gradniiou  ;  we  do  not  ob- 
I  serve  the  Jewish  Sabbath,  nor  judge  others  in  re^ipect  of  that  Snb- 
ft  bub,  no  more  than,  for  observing  new  moons  or  holy  dnys,  we  do 
I  Blteriy  condemn  the  obserralion  of  that  Sabbath.  If  it  be  said, 
I  Vhy  do  we  not  observe  new  moons  and  holy  days,  as  well  by  sub- 
I  •tilultng  other  days  in  their  room,  as  we  do  a  Christian  Sabbath 
V  in  the  mnm  of  that  Jewish  Snbbaih  ?  we  shall  give  the  reason  of 
I  il  in  its  proper  place,  which  I  mention  not  here,  lest  I  should  biM 
k  toetam  npponere.  These  places  therefore  are  strong  ailments 
I  for  not  oWrvlng  tluit  seventh  day  which  was  Jewish  and  cere- 
ft  Bonial,  but  ihey  give  no  sulHcient  ground  for  abandoning  all 
I  Clirisluui  Sabbaths  under  the  gospel. 

I  Thirdly,  there  is  a  double  obf^ervulion  of  days,  (as  Wallseus  and 
I  Davenant  well  observe:)  1.  Moral.  2.  Ceremonial.  Now,  the 
P  apoAile,  in  the  places  alleged,  speaks  against  the  ceremonial  and 
ft  Pharisaical  observation  of  days,  but  Dot  moral ;  for  days  of  fast- 

■  aig  (u%  to  be  observed  under  the  gospel,  (the  Lord  Christ  our 
I  Brtd««room  bi-ing  now  taken  from  us,  when  our  Saviour  expressly 
I  toll*  UK.  that  then  his  disciples,  even  when  they  had  the  giM^alcsl 
R  aejwures  uf  Christ's  spiritual  presence,  should  fast.)    (Matt.  is. 

■  15.  16.)  But  we  are  to  observe  days  with  moral,  not  cer- 
I  «maiiiiU  nbservation,  such  as  the  Jews  had,  in  sackcloth,  ashes, 

■  iMring  knir,  rending  garments,  and  many  other  cercmoniHl  trap- 
I  pings  i  we  are  to  rend  our  hearts,  and  cry  mightily  unto  God  upon 
^^fcmf  days,  which  is  the  moral  observance  of  them.  So  it  is  iu 
^■MMBof  Ihe  Sabbath ;  no  Sabbalh  day,  under  the  gospel,  is  to  be 
^^H|HM*ith  ceremonial  or  pharisaical  observation,  with  Jewish 
^HpRlion»,  sacrifices,  needless  abstinence  ft-om  lawful  work,  and 
^^■Ob*  formalities ;  but  doth  it  hence  follow,  that  no  days  are 
ViB  be  obwrved  under  the  gospt:!  with  moral  observation,  in  hear- 
■.Ipg  the  word,  receiving  the  sacraments,  singing  of  psalms?  elis. 
KThaw  w»f  114  morality  in  the  d«w  moous,  by  virtue  of  ai^y  spaciul 

coramandmenl,  and  therefore  it  is  in 
may  not  be  observed  still,  as  well  n 

vain  to  ask  why  new  moona 
i  Sabbaths,  provided  ibnt  it 
be  obaervatione  morali  ;  for  there  is  a  morality  in  observing  Iho 
Sabbath,  and  thai  by  a  special  cDmrnaod,  which  is  not  in  new 
moons  and  holy  days;  and  therefore,  as  we  utterly  abandon  all 
that  which  was  in  the  Sabbath  ceremonial,  so  we  do  and  should 
heartily  retain  and  observe  that  whiuh  is  moral  herein,  with  moral 
observance  hereof. 

Jiesii  75.  There  were  among  the  Jews  days  ceremonially 
holy,  03  well  as  meats  ceremonially  unclean  ;  now,  in  that  oilier 
place  which  they  urge  against  the  observation  of  any  days  under 
the  gospel,  (Bom.  siv.  5,)  therein  days  ceremonial  are  com- 
pared with  meats  ceremonial,  and  not  moral  days  with  ceremo- 
nial meals.  It  is  therefore  readily  acknowledged  that  it  wan  an 
error  and  weakness  in  some  to  think  Ihemselres  bound  to  eeilain 
ceremonial  days,  as  well  as  it  was  to  abstain  from  certain  cere- 
monial meats ;  but  will  it  hence  fallow,  that  it  is  n  part  of  Chiis- 
tian  liberty  and  strength  to  abandon  all  days  as  ceremonial  ?  and 
that  it  is  a  part  of  Christian  weakness  to  observe  any  day  under 
the  gospel  Jx- This  verily  hath  not  the  face  of  any  reason  for  it 
from  this  scripture,  wherein  the  apostle  (doubtless)  speaks  of 
ceremonial,  not  moral  days,  as  (shall  appear)  our  Christian  Sab- 
baths be.  And,  look  as  it  is  duty  (not  weakness)  sometimes  to 
abstain  from  some  meats,  as  in  the  case  of  extraordinary  humili- 
ation, as  we  see  in  Daniel,  (Dan.  ix.  and  xi.,)  so  il  may  be  duty 
(not  weakness)  still  to  observe  some  days ;  I  say  not  the  seveiiLh 
day,  for  that  is  not  now  the  question,  but  some  days  are  or  may 
be  necessary  to  be  observed  now. 

Theti*  76.  If  any  man  sliall  put  any  holiness  in  a  day  which 
God  doth  not,  and  so  think  one  day  moie  holy  than  another,  thii 
is  most  abominable  superstition,  and  this  is  indeed  to  observe 
days  ;  and  of  this  tho  apostle  seems  to  speak,  when  he  sailb, 
"  Ye  observe  days  ;"  but  when  the  Lord  shall  put  holiness  upon 
pne  day  more  than  upon  another,  we  do  not  then  put  any  hollnesi 
in  the  day,  but  God  dtith  it,  nor  do  we  place  any  holiness  in  one 
day  more  than  In  another,  but  God  plaeeih  it  first;  and  this  is  no 
obsen'ation  of  days,  which  the  apostle  condemns  in  those  that 
were  weak,  but  of  tlie  will  of  God  which  he  every  where 

Thesis  77.  There  is  (as  some  call  it)  SabbatAum  interaam 
tl  externum,  i.  e.,  an  internal  and  external  Sabbath ;  the  first 
(if  I  (nay  lawfully  call  it  a  Sabbath)  is  to  be  kept  every  day  in 
a  special  rest  from  sin  \  tlie  second  is  to  be  observed  at  ceriain 
time#  sod  on  speuuil  days  ;  now,  il'  that  other  plAce  (Is.  Ixvi.  23) 


■  rat:  s.vbbath. 

(which  is  much  urged  for  the  equality  of  all  uajs)  be  meant  of 
I  m  coniinual  Sobbaih,  so  thiri  those  wonl^,  "  fromsKubbaih  lo  Sub- 
I  buh,"  if  they  dignify  a  eonstani,  continual  wor.ihi^'irf  God  indeC- 
I  initely,  then  the  pro))het  speaks  of  an  intertial  Sabbat hTVii^ich  shall 
'n  f pecial  be  observed  under  the  gospel ;  but  tbia  doth  not  aboliflh 
I  lhf>  observation  of  an  external  Sabbath  ab^o.  no  more  lliun  in  tbe 
lime*  before  ibe  goi^pel,  when  the  people  of  Gud  were  tiound  to 
I   observe  a  <v>ntiDUHl  Sabbath  and  rest  from  iin,  and  yet  wtire  not 
exempted  hereby  from  external  Sabbatba,  oa\y  because  more 
e  b  poured  out  upon  the  people  of  Gud  under  tbe  New  Tes- 
I   ttment  than  under  the  Old,  and  under  aonie  times  and  seasons 
I  of  the  New  Testament,  and  some  people,  more  than  at  and  upon 
I  others :  hence  tbid  prophecy  points  at  the  limes  of  tbe  gospel, 
wherein  God's  people  shall  worehip  God  more  spiritually  and  con- 
tinually than  in  former  limes.     But  if  by  this  phrase,  "  from  Sab- 
bath to  Sabbath,"  be  meant  succession,  i.  e.,  one  Sabbath  after 
knuther  succe«sively,  wherein  God's  people  shall  enjoy  blessed 
fvlkiwsbip  with  God  from  Sabtiatb  to  Sabbath,  successively  in  the 
worship  of  him,  one  Sabbath  after  another,  then  this  place  is  such 
t  •  weapon  in  their  own  bonds   against  them^elvef,  as  that  it 
wouiuls  to  tbe  heart  tliat  accursed  conceit,  that  all  days  should  be 
^wndoned  by  those  under  the  New  Testament.     Itut  suppose 
It  by  Sabbath  is  not  meant  the  weekly  Sabbath,  (fur  then,  say 
ae,  what  will  you  undcnitand  by  now  moons,  which  are  con- 
I  jtnned  with  them  ?)  yet  these  two  things  are  evident :  I.  That 
1  SabhMhs  and  new  moons  were  set  times  of  worshiping  God  under 
I  the  Old  Testament.     8.  That  it  is  usual  with  the  prophets  to 
ail  (and  not  always  to  type  out)  the  worthip,  and  so  the  limes 
I  at  worship  which  were  lo  be  under  the  New  Testament,  under 
1  Ibe  ordiuonees  of  God  observed  in  the  Old.  as  may  appear.  Is. 
I  six.  19 i  Ual.  i.  11  ;  asalwby  Eiekiel's  temple,  and  such  like: 
I  lwn«*,  then,  it  follows,  that  alihougb  this  place  should  not  evict  a 
Iwvcnth  day's  Sabbath,  yet  it  demonstrates  at  least  thus  much, 
■  Ihu  tame  set  times  and  days,  fihadowed  out  under  the  name  of 
I'Mw  mooos  and  Sabbaths,  are  to  be  observed  under  tha  New 
I  Tetdameni ;  and  this  is  sufficient  lo  prove  ihe  point  in  bund,  that 
U  days  are  not  equal  under  tbe  gospeL 
7%««w  78.     The  kingdom  of  heaven,  indeed,  doth  nol  consist 
I  In  meat  and  drink,  as  the  a|iosile  saith,  (Kotn.  xiv.  17,)  i.  e.,  in 
ase  of  external  indilferent  things,  as  those  meats  and  drinks, 
■And  some  kind  of  days,  were ;  or  if  in  some  sense  it  did,  yet  nut 
B'iriiiefly  in  tbem,  as  if  almost  all  religion  did  chiefly  consist  in 
K  tbem  :  but  doih  it  from  hence  follow,  iliat  it  consists  not  in  things 
^Wnuuonded,  nor  in  any  set  days  of  wgc^bip,  which   arq  woi* 



manded  ?  If  because  the  kingdom  nf  God  consistK  in  intemal 
peace,  and  riglitcou^neas,  and  juy  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  thai  there- 
fore all  Rxleronl  observances  of  times  and  duties  of  worship  ara 
not  necessary  to  be  attended  by  gospel  wol-shipers,  (as  some 
secreily  imagine,)  then  farewell  all  external  preaching,  sacra* 
meuts,  profession,  and  confession  of  tlie  name  of  Christ,  as  well 
aa  Sabbaihs :  and  let  such  artists  of  licentiousness  bring  in  all 
profaneness  into  the  world  again,  by  a  law  from  heaven,  not  con- 
deuuing  the  acts  of  the  outward  man,  though  never  so  uboraina- 
lile,  in  abstinence  from  which  (by  this  rule)  the  kingdom  of  heav- 
en doth  not  coneiaL  Is  it  no  honor  to  the  King  of  glory  (as  it 
is  to  eartlity  princes)  to  be  served  sometimes  upon  spetiial  fesli- 
valfl,  in  special  alate,  with  specinl  and  glorious  attendance  by  his 
people,  as  well  as  after  a  common  and  usual  manner  every  day  ? 
We  have  seen  some,  who  have  at  first  held  community  of  days 
only,  lo  full  at  last  (through  the  righteous  judgment  of  God 
blinding  tlicir  hearts)  to  maintain  community  of  wives;  and  that 
because  the  kingdom  of  God  hath  (-as  ihey  have  thought)  con- 
sisted no  more  in  outward  relations,  (as  that  is  between  bui^bands 
and  wives)  than  in  (he  observation  of  external  circumsiancos 
and  days. 

1  "   'metis  73,     But  this  is  not  the  ordinary  principle  by  which 

■  many  are  led  lo  maintain  an  equality  of  days  under  the  gospel ; 
but  ibis  chiefly,  viz.,  that  tlic  moral  law  is  not  to  be  a  Christian's 
rule  of  life ;  for  we  acknowledge  it  to  be  no  covenant  of  life  to  a 
believer,  that  either  by  the  keeping  of  it  he  should  be  justified, 
or  that  for  the  breach  of  it  In;  should  be  condemned ;  but  titey 
say,  that  when  a  believer  hath  life  by  the  covenant  of  grace,  the 
law  b  now  not  ho  much  nn  a  rule  of  life  to  such  a  one  ;  and  then 
it  is  no  wonder  if  they  who  blow  out  the  tight  of  the  whole  moral 
law  from  being  a  light  to  tlu^ir  feet  and  a  lamp  to  their  paths,  if 
they  hereby  utterly  extinguish  this  pari  of  it,  viz.,  the  command- 

|ment  of  the  Sabbath.  |  This  dashing  against  the  whole  law  is 
the  very  rayBtery  of  ibis  iniquity,  why  some  do  cashier  this  law 
of  the  Sabbath :  and  Ihey  do  but  hide  themselves  behind  a 
ihreud,  when  (hey  oppose  it  by  their  weapons,  who  therefore 
abandon  it,  hecnuse  it  nlonst  is  ceremonial,  above  any  other  taw. 
THen'f  t^O.     "The  SitbUiih"  (saith  one)  "is  perpetual  and 

'  moral,  but  not  the  Subbnih  day;  the  Sabbath"  (which  some  make 
continual  and  inward  only)  "is  perpetually  to  be  observed,  but 
not  the  Sulibiiih  day ;  a  Sabbath  is  by  divine  ordinaiiuo,  but  a 
Sabbath  day  is  lo  be  observed  only  as  a  human  consliiuiiuii."  liut 
they  should  do  well  to  consider,  whether  that  which  ihey  call  an 
inward  cootiuuol  Sabbath  b«  ioconsisleDt  with  a  upttdal  day ;  for  I 




a  tare  that  iLoy  uDder  the  Old  TeslAmcnl  were  bound  equally 
'  tritb  us  to  observe  a  conlinual  Sabbath  iu  resting  rrom  all  sin, 
L  ud  reding  in  Go<l  by  Jvsus  Chml,  (Hob.  iv.  1,  2;)  yet  this 
I  4id  not  exempt  ihem  from  observing  a  special  day.  A  Epecial 
L  day  u  A  mo^t  powerful  mcuns  lo  Sabbaiize  every  day  ;  why  then 
1  Slay  not  a  Subbaih  aod  n  Sabbath  day  consist  together  ?  An 
IiBirery-day  Sabbath  h  equally  opposite  to  h  lime  occsaionally  set, 
1|^  to  a  set  day,  which  the  coDunandracnt  enjoins  ;  and  therefore, 
B'jf  it  exempts  a  Christian  from  observing  a  set  day,  it  sets  him 
B'free  aiso  from  all  observation  of  any  euch  set  time ;  for  if,  because 
rvUiristian  Sabbath  ought  to  be  continual,  and  that  therefore 
here  ought  to  be  no  set  days,  then  there  should  not  be  any  occa- 
ioually  tet  times  for  the  worship  of  Giod,  because  these  neither 
fto  be  continual ;  aod  if  there  ought  to  be  no  such  set  times,  wa 
f  moij  ibeo  bid  good  night  to  all  the  public  worsbip  and  glory  of  ~ 
I  God  iu  ilic  world,  lUie  the  man  with  one  eye  to  him  who  put  his 
I  pUicr  vje  quite  oui.  And  if  aiiy  here  reply,  that  there  M  not  the 
k  Ute  rcMfion,  because  holy  liuie  and  days  arc  not  necessary,  but 
t  hxHy  duties  are  ueces^ary,  and  therefore  retjuire  some  occasional 
I  au  time  fur  them.  I  answer,  that,  let  the  difference  be  grunted,  yet 
,1  whieli  I  now  dispute  on  is  this  ground  and  supptt<ilion  only, 
I  TU^  tluil  if  all  s«t  days  ar«  to  be  abandoned,  because  a  Christian's 
I  Sabhalb  ought  to  be  continual  and  inward,  theu  all  ocin^ionul 
Y  let  times  aido  are  to  be  abandoned  upon  the  same  ground,  be- 
I  fiMue  these  can  not  be  continual  and  inward  no  more  than  the 
I  ^tber :  ae  for  them  who  think  no  holy  day  necessary,  but  holy 
•0  lawful  every  <lay,  we  have  already,  and  shall  bcreaAer 
_  r  up  more  fully  in  iu  proper  place.  Meanwhile  it  is  yet 
I  doubtful  to  me  whether  those  who  follow  Master  Saltmarsh  and 
ne  others  will  acknowledge  the  of  any  occasional 
:  timm  for  public  worship,  of  hearing  the  word  and  prayer, 
[  tU-  For  he  makes  the  bosom  of  the  Father  to  be  the  Chri»- 
rlki)  S^Utbaih,  typified  in  the  seventh  day  of  the  first  creation, 
I  (Bf)  be  makes  the  six  days  of  work  to  be  a  type,  not  only  of  the 
I  I<ard  JcfUS  in  his  nrCtive  aod  fulfilling  administrations  while  he 
1  Vtu  in  ibii  flesh,  but  also  to  be  a  figure  of  the  Christian  in  bond- 
I IB*^'  "^  (to  "^  '<i^  "*■'  words)  of  a  Christian  under  active  and 
I-  Working  adminisirittiuns,  as  ibose  of  the  law  and  gospel  are.  B3 
'\  forms  of  worship,  duties,  graces,  prayer,  ordinances,  etc. 
rom  wb«uce  it  wjll  follow,  (from  his  principles,  for  I  know  not 
I  pntctice.)  that  all  fonns  of  worship,  duties,  graces,  prayer, 
R ordinance*,  urn  tlieu  lo  ceuse.  o-'^  types,  and  shadows,  and  ligure«, 
D  oncL'  the  substance  is  come,  (o  wit.  when  they  come  in  this 
mW^  lo  the  higlte&t  atlAininenl,  which  is  the  bosom  of  the  Father, 


THK   1 

man/  N 

which  bosom  is  tl»e  Iriie  Sabbnth  of  a  Christian  man/  Now,  I 
confess  ihnt  (be  bosom  of  God  in  Clirist  is  our  rest,  and  our  all 
in  all  in  heaven,  and  uur  sweet  consolalion  anil  r<?sl  on  earth,  and 
that  we  are  not  to  rest  in  anj  means,  ordinances,  graces,  duties, 
but  to  look  beyond  them  all,  and  to  be  carried  by  them  above 
them  all,  to  Him  that  is  better  than  all,  to  Uod  in  Christ  Jesus ; 
but  to  make  this  bosom  of  God  a  kind  of  canker  worm  to  fret 
and  eat  out  the  heart  and  being,  not  only  of  all  Sabbaths  and 
ordinances  of  worship,  but  also  of  all  duties  and  graces  of  God'a 
Spirit,  nay,  of  Christ  Jesus  himself,  as  he  is  manifested  in  the 
flesh,  and  is  an  external  Mediator,  whom  some  lately  have  also 
cast  into  the  same  box  with  the  rest,  being  sent  only  (as  they 
think)  to  reveal,  but  not  to  procure  the  Father's  love  of  delight, 
and  ifaerefors  is  little  else  than  a  mere  form,  and  so  to  cease 
when  the  Father  comes  in  the  room  of  all  forms,  and  so  is  nil  in 
all.  This,  I  dare  say,  is  such  a  high  affront  to  the  precious  blood 
of  Christ,  and  his  glorious  name,  and  blessed  spirit  of  grace,  that 
be  who  hath  his  furnace  in  Zion,  and  his  (ire  in  Jerusalem,  will 
not  bear  it  long,  without  making  their  judgments  and  plagues  (at 
least  spiritual)  exemplary  and  wonderful,  and  leading  them  forth 
in  such  crooked  ways,  with  the  workers  of  iniquity,  when  peace 
I  aliall  be  upon  Israel.  Are  these  abstracted  notions  of  a  Deity 
I  (into  the  vision  and  contemplation  of  whose  amazing  glory  —  with- 
out seeing  him  as  he  is  in  Christ  —  a  Christian,  they  say,  must 
be  plunged,  lost,  and  swallowed  up,  and  up  to  which  he  must 
ascend,  even  to  the  unapproachable  light)  the  true  and  only 
tiabbaib?  Are  these  (I  say)  the  new  and  glorious  light  bceak- 
ing  out  in  these  days,  which  this  age  must  wait  for?  which  are 
nothing  else  (upon  narrow  search)  than  monkish  imaginations, 
the  goodly  cobwel«  of  the  brain-imi^ery  of  those  idolatrous  and 
superstitious  hypocrites,  the  anchorites,  monks,  and  friars  ;  who, 
to  make  the  blind  and  simple  world  admire  and  gaze  upon  ihem, 
gave  it  out  hereby,  like  Simon  Magus,  that  they  were  some  great 
ones,  even  the  ^ery  power  and  familiars  of  God.  Surely,  in 
these  limes  of  distraction,  war,  and  blood,  if  ever  the  Lord  called 
for  sackcloth,  humiliation,  repentance,  faith,  graces,  holiness,  pre- 
cious esteem  of  God's  ordinances,  and  of  that  gospel  which  hath 
been  the  power  of  God  to  the  salvation  of  thousands,  now  is  the 
time ;  and  must  God's  people  reject  these  things  as  their  A,  B,  C  ? 
and  must  the  new  tight  of  these  times  be  the  dreams, and  visions, 
Ljind  slaverings  of  doting  and  deluded  old  monks?  Shall  the 
simplicity  of  gospel  ministry  be  rejected,  as  a  common  thing, 
and  shall  Haruktitt,  Theologia  Mt/ifica,  Augwtinu*  JSlulhe- 
riu4,   Jaeoh   BrJimen.    Cufamit,   Raimundut   Scibund,    Theologia 

r  TUE   MORALITV    <H    TItt:    SAlitiAtn.  83 

tifennaiiieai  niii)  such  like  raonk-admirers,  lie  set  up  as  llie  iiewl 
lights  and  beacooa  on  the  mounuin  of  ilie^e  elevuted  timgg?! 
Sbrelj  (if  (o)  God  hath  his  time  and  waj^  of  putting  a  better 
reliuh  to  his  precious  gospel,  and  the  cross  of  Christ,  which  wos 
wont  in  Faul'a  time  to  be  pluinlj  preached,  without  such  Popish 
paintings,  and  wherein  Grod's  people  knew  how  lu  reconcile  their 
aweet  rest  in  ihi?  bosom  of  the  Father,  and  their  Sahbnih  dny. 
TTietU  81.  If  ein  (whicli  is  the  transgress ion-of  the  law)  he  the 
»te«t  evil,  then  hohness  (wltich  isjuiLOjjiforiijity  in  ihe  law)  is 
r  greatest  good.  If  sin  be  inan's  greatest  misery,  then  holiness 
a'e  greatest  happiness :  it  is  therelbre  no  bondage  for  a  Chris- 

0  be  bound  l«4he  observance  of  the  lavr  as  his  rule,  because 
t  onljr  binds  him  fast  to  his  greatest  happiness,  and  thereby 
"  ects  and  keeps  him  safe  from  falling  into  the  greatest  misery 

i  woe ;  and  if  the  great  design  of  Christ,  in  coming  into  the 
srld,  wad  not  so  much  to  save  man  from  affliction  and  sor- 
«,  (which  arc  lesser  evils.)  but  chiefly  from  sin,  (which  is  the 
it  evil,)  then  the  chief  end  of  his  coming  was  not  (as  some 
i)  U  lift  his  people  up  into  the  love  and  abstracted  epecii- 
[.  the  Father  above  the  law  of  Gnd,  but  into  his  own 
where  only  we  have  ft-llowship  with  the  Father 
B  iaw  of  sin. 

I  B2.  The  blood  of  Christ  wan  never  shed  to  destroy  all 
tase  of  sin  and  sight  of  sin  in  believers,  and  consequently  all 
tendance  to  any  rule  of  the  law,  by  which  means  chiefly  sin 
w  seen  ;  but  he  died  rather  to  make  ihem  sensible  of 
:  for  if  he  died  to  save  men  from  sin,  (as  is  evident,  I  John 
i.  5;  11l  ii.  14,)  then  he  died  to  make  his  people  sensible  of 
I,  because  licreby  his  people's  hearts  are  chielly  weaned  and 
ktered  from  it,  and  saved  out  of  it,  (as  by  hardness  and  insen- 
~leiwka  of  heart  under  it,  I  hey  chietly  cleave  to  it,  and  it  to 
beiD ;)  lutd  therefore  we  know  thai  godly  sorrow  works  repenl- 
novor  to  he  repented  of.  (2  Cor.  vii.  10.)  And  that  Pha- 
s  hardness  of  heart  strengthened  him  in  his  sin  agiunst  God 
■to  the  lost  gasp,  and  hence  it  is  also  that  the  deepest  and 
atest  spirit  of  mourning  for  sin  is  jnured  out  upon  believers, 
tr  God  hath  poured  out  upon  them  the  Spirit  of  grace,  as  is  evi- 
nt,  (Zcch.  xii.  10,  11,)  because  the  blood  of  Christ,  which  was 
:  the  killing  of  their  sin,  now  midies  ihem  sensible  of 
r  ain,  because  it  is  now  sprinkled  and  applied  to  them,  which 

1  not  before,  for  they  now  see  all  their  sins  aggravated, 
ing  DOW  not  only  sins  against  the  law  of  God,  bui  against  the 

1  and  love  of  the  Son  of  God :  it  is  therefore  a  tnoni  tut- 
»d  doctrine  of  some  libcrlines,  who  imagining  that  (through 


Ihe  bloodslied  and  righteousness  of  Christ  in  their  free  justifica- 
tion) God  sees  no  sin  in  liia  ju.atified  people,  tliat  therefore  lhem> 
selves  are  lo  see  no  sin,  because  now  they  are  justified  and 
washed  with  Christ's  blood ;  and  therefore  lest  they  should  bo" 
found  out  to  be  gross  liars,  lliey  mince  the  matter,  they  confess 
that  they  may  see  sin  by  the  eye  of  sense  and  reason,  but  (faith 
being  cross  i«  reason)  they  are  therefore  to  see  the  quite  con- 
trary, and  so  to  see  no  sin  in  themselres  by  Ihe  eye  of  faith ; 
from  whence  it  follows,  that  Christ  shed  his  blood  to  destroy  all 
sight  and  sense  of  sin  to  the  eye  of  faith,  though  not  to  the  eye  of 
reason,  and  thus,  as  by  the  eye  of  faith  they  should  see  no  sin,  so 
(it  will  follow)  that  by  the  same  blood  they  ore  bound  to  see  no 
law,  no,  not  so  much  aa  their  rule,  which  as  a  rule  is  index  «ui 
et  ,oblii/ui.  and  in  revealing  man's   duly   declares    his    sin.   'I 

1  know  that,  in  beholding  our  free  juBlification  by  the  blood  of 

I  Christ,  we  are  to  exclude  all  law  from  our  consciences  as  a  cove- 
nant of  life,  not  to  see  or  fear  any  condemnation  for  sin,  or  any 
sin  able  to  lake  away  life  :  but  will  it  hence  follow,  that  a  jus- 
tified person  mufit  see  no  sin  by  the  eye  of  faith,  nor  any  law  ss 
his  rale  to  walk  by,  to  discover  sin  ?  and  is  this  the  end  and 
fVuit  of  Christ's  death  too  ?  Surely  this  doctrine,  if  it  be  not 
blasphemous,  yet  it  may  be  known  to  be  very  false  and  per- 
nicious, by  [be  old  rule  of  judging  false  doctrines,  \-ir.,  if  eithir 

I  they  tend  to  extenuate  sin  in  man,  or  to  vilify  the  precious  grace 

\  of  Jesua  Cliria%  as  this  doctrine  doth. 

fhstii  83.  If  sin  be  the  transgression  of  the  law,  (which  is  a 
truth  written  by  the  apostle  with  the  beams  of  the  snn,  (1  John 
■  iii,  i,)  then  of  necessity  a  believer  is  bound  to  attend  the  law  as 
his  rule,  that  so  he  may  not  sin  or  Iransgress  that  rule,  (Ps. 
cxis.  11;)  for  whoever  makes  conscience  of  sin  can  not  but 
make  conscience  of  observinjf  the  rule,  that  so  he  may  not  sin  i 
and  conaequeotly  whoever  make  no  conscience  of  observing 
the  rule  do  openly  professs  thereby  that  they  make  no  con- 
Bcience  of  commiiling  any  sin,  whicli  is  palpable  and  down- 
right atheism  tuid  profnneness ;  nay,  it  is  such  profaneness 
(by  some  men's  principles)  which  Christ  bath  purdiased  fur 
them  by  his  blood;  for  ibey  make  the  death  of  Christ  the 
foundation  of  this  ltl)erty  and  freedom  from  the  law,  as  their 
rule ;  tlie  very  thought  of  which  abominable  doctrine  may  smile 
a  heart,  who  hath  the  least  tenderness,  with  horror  and  trem- 
bling. Porquius,  therefore,  a  great  libertine,  and  the  Beelzebub 
of  those  flies  in  Calvin's  time,  shuts  his  sore  eyes  against  this 
definition  of  sin,  delivered  by  the  apostle,  and  makes  this  only  to 
be  a  sin.  viz.,  to  see,  know,  ur  feel  sin,  and  that  the  great  sin  of 



a  is  ro  think  llitU  he  doth  sin.  nnd  lhn(  (hU  U  lo  put  off  lbs 
tonn,  vUt  Bid  eernendo  ampli'ui peccatum,  i.e.,  by  not  seeing  -_" 

Su  thai  when  the  apostle  leila  us,  that  em  is  Ibe  Iransgres- 

I  of  the.  law,  Porqiiiua  tells  us,  that  sin  is  the  seeing  and 

Ing  notice  of  nny  such  transgression  ;  surely  if  they  that  con- 

I  sin  shall  Hnd  mcrey,  [heu  they  that  will  not  bo  much  ob  «ee 

a  shall  find  none  at  all,     A  believer,  indeed,  ia  to  die  unto  the 

m,  and  to  see  no  sin  in  himself  in  point  of  impQIation,  (for  so 

kIw  sees  the  truth,  there  being  no  condemnation  to  them  in  Christ 

B2Mu*.)but  thus  lo  die  unto  the  law.  so  as  to  eeo  no  sin  inherent  in 

Ekimself  against  the   taw,  ihis  is   impious,   (fur  so  lo  see  nu  siu, 

land  die    unto  the  law.  is  an   untruth,'  if  the  apostle  may  be 

I  Mieved.  (1  John  i.  10.)     Those  that  so  annihilate  a  ChrUtianTI 

1  make  him  nothing,  and  God  all,  so  that  a  Chrisiian  must'l 

I  vither  tare,  itlU.  or  gmijit  any  thing  of  himself,  but  he  must  be  * 

1 'Melted  thny  (jod,  and  die  to  tlieae,  (for  then  they  say  he  is  out  of 

I  Vbe  flesh,)  and  tivt-  in  God,  un<l  God  must  be  himself,  and  such 

IMte  language^  whidi  in  truth  is  nothing  else  but  the  swelling 

Blnven  of  the  devout  and  proud  monks,  laid  up  of  late  iu  ihnt 

Eftulc  pock  of  mesl  of  T/ieologia  Germanicot  out  of  which  Bom« 

'•en  up  of  lute  have  mode  iheir  ntked,  for  the  ordinary  food  of 

Mir  deluded  hearers:  I  say,  ilietie  men  had  need  lake  heed 

■fcw  they  stand  upon  this  precipice,  and  that  they  deliver  their 

warily ;  for  although  a  Christian  is  to  be  nothing  by 

iKeing  and  loathing  himself  for  sin,  that  so  Christ  may  be  nil  in 

11  t»  him,  yet  so  lo  be  made  nothing,  as  to  $ee,  know,  think, 

mI,  will,  desire  nothing  In  respect  of  one's  self,  doth  inevitably 

»d  to  see  no  sin  in  one's  self,  by  seeing  which  the  sout  is  most 

^«f  all   humbled,   and  so   God   and  Jesus   Christ  is   most   of  all  I 

Itu]  J  and  yet  such  a  kind  of  annihilation  the  old  monks  have) 

K'pleaded  Tor,  and  preached  also,  (as  I  coald  show  abundantly  from 

It  of  their  own  writings,)  insomuch  that  sometimes  they  counsel 

in  not  lo  pray,  because  Ihey  must  be  so  far  annihilated   as 

til  p(sB#  ;  and  sometimes  they  would  feign  tliemselves  unable 

O  bear  the  burden  of  the  species  of  their  own  pitchers  in  their 

idU  from  one  end  of  them  unio  another,  because,  forsooth,  they 

o  far  annihilaiod  as  neither  to  vtlle,  so  neither  to  tcire  or 

low  any  thing  bfsidu  God,  whom  they  pretended  to  be  all  unto 

11,  and  tltemsi-hes  nothing,  when  God  knows  these  things 

e  tmt  brain  bubbles,  and  themselves  in  these  things  as  arrant 

^potritet  as  tJie  euiib  bore,  and  the  most  subtle  underminers  of 

K  gracQ  of  Christ  and  the  salvation  of  men's  souls.  . 

T&Mi'i  84.     A  true  believer,  thougli  he  can  not  keep  the  law  I 

rfe«dy,  as  hU  rule,  yet  be  loves  it,  dearly :  he  blames  his  own  I  ' 


'  lietirt  wlieii  he  can  not  keep  it,  but  dolh  not  find  faull  wtlli  the  Taw 
as  loo  hard/ but  cries  out  with  Paul,  "The  law  is  holy  and  good, 
Gul  I  am  carnal ; "  he  lovus  thia  copy,  though  he  can  but  scribble 
aflcr  it;  when,  therefoi'e,  the  questioa  is  made,  vis:.,  whether  a 
believer  be  bouud  to  the  law  as  his  rule,  the  meaning  is  not, 
whether  he  hath  power  to  keep  it  exactly  as  his  rule,  or  by  what 
means  he  is  to  seek  power  to  keep  it ;  but  (he  question  is,  wheth- 
er it  be  in  itself  a  believer's  rule ;  for  fo  to  be  a  rule  is  one 
thing,  but  lo  be  able  lo  keep  it,  and  by  what  nienna  we  should 
keep  it,  whether  by  our  own  strength  or  no,  or  by  i)ower  from 
on  high,  is  another. 

Thetit  sa.  If  the  njKMlle  had  thought  that  all  believers  wero 
free  from  this  directive  power  of  ihe  law,  he  would  never  have 
persuaded  them  lo  love,,  upon  this  ground,  viz.,  because  all  the 
law  is  I'ul filled  in  Jove,  (Gat.  v.  13, 14,)  for  they  might  then  have 
weak  and  feeble,  and  have  truly  said,  {if 
,)  Whal  have  we  to  do  with  the  law  ? 
There  is  the  inward  law  written  on  the  heart, 
ii.  2,)  and  there   i 

cast  oR'  this  argument  a 
this  principle  were  true 

'Thmi  86. 
called  Ihe  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life,  (Rom 

'  the  outward  law  revealed  and  written  in  Ihe  Holy  Scriptures. 
Now,  the  extenial^a[|di)ul)yardlaw  is  properly  the  rule  of  a  Chris- 
tian lifeTan^not  tjic  internal  nnilJaS^^la*^^  (as  some  conceive ;) 
for  the  oulwac^Jaw  is  that  it  perfectly  declares  whal  is 
God's  will  andwlianE5lT'but  the  inward  bw  (as  received  and 
writ  in  our  hearts)  is  iimnrfprt  jp  (jjia  lifi-.  and  therefore  unfit  to 
b«  our  nite.  The  inwai-d  law  is  our  actual  (yet  imperfect)  con- 
formity to  the  rule  of  ihe  law  without',  it  is  not,  therefore,  the 
rule  itself;  the  htwwilhinjs^iRjIiing  lo  fyi  ruU-d.  (Pe,  xvii.  4i 
cxIk.  4,  5.)  The  outward  lawTiberefore,  is  the  rule ;  the  law 
of  the  Spirit  of  life  (which  is  the  internal  law)  is  called  a  law, 
not  in  respect  of  perfect  direction,  (which  is  essential  to  the  rule,) 
but  in  respect  of  mighty  and  effectual  openition.  there  being  a 
power  in  it  as  of  a  strong  law  effectually  fltlU  BWeelly  compelling 
to  the  obedience  of  the  law  ;/for  as  the  law  of  sin  wiihin  us 
(wlitch  the  ajwslle  calls  the  law  of  our  members,  and  is  contrary 
to  the  law  of  our  minds,  or  the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life  within  us) 
is  not  Ihe  rule  of  knowing  and  judging  whal  sin  is,  but  the  law 
of  God  wilhoul,  (Rom.  vii.  7,)  and  yd  it  is  called  a  law,  because 
it  hath  a  compulsive  power  lo  act  and  incline  to  sin,  like  a  mighty 
and  forcible  law  ;  so  the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  life,  the  law  of  our 
minds,  is  called  a  law  ;  not  that  it  is  the  rule  of  a  Christian's  life, 
but  that  it  uomjiels  the  heart,  and  forcetb  it,  like  a  living  law,  to 
tliQobe<lience  of  that  directing  rule  (when  it  is  made  known  to 

I'll)  from  without.     It  iti  therefore  a  great  mistake  to  Ibinlc  ihM 

I^God  translates  tiie  Inw  without  into  a  belii^ver's  heart,! 

refore  ihti  heart  law  is  hb  onlj  or  principiil  rule  of  lire,! 

fcwtnBgine  ihai  the  Spirit  without  tbe  external  law  is  the  rule  \ 

F«f  life;  the  Spirit  is  the   priiidple,  indeed,  or  our   obedience,  ' 

I  whereby  we  conform  unto  the  rule,  but  it  is  not  therefore  the  r 

l-tnelf.  /It  is  true  indeed,  1.  That  the  Spirit  inclines  the  heart  [ 

)  the  obedience  of  the  rule.     2.  It  illuminates  the  mil 

!  many  limes  to  see  it  by  secret  shininga  of   preventing   light, 

[  u  well  as  brings  things  to  their  remembrance  which  they  knew 

before.     3.  It  acts  them  also  aomeiimes,  so  as  when  they  know 

Bot  what  to  pray,  it  prompts  them.  (Rom.  viii.  ]C.)     When  they 

I  know  not  what  to  speak  before  their  adversaries,  in  that  day  it  is 

I  given  to  Ihem,  (Matt.  x.  19  ;)  when  they  know  not  whillier  to 

go,  nor  how  to  go,  it  is  then  a  voice  behind  them,  and  leads  ihem 

to  roantains  of    living  waters.    (Is.  xxx.   21.     Rev.   vii.  17.) 

I  But  all  these  and  such  like  quickening  acts  of  the  Spirit  do  not 

1  argue  it  to  be  our  rule,  accoriling  to  which  we  ought  to  walk,  but 

I  only  by  which,  or  by   means  of  which,  we_OTmeto_wa!k,  and 

I  «re  inclined,  directed,  and  enabled  to  walk 'according  to  the  rule, 

I  which  id  the  law  of  God  without.     For  the  pilot  of  the  ship  ia 

BOt   the  compass   of    the    ship,   becau::te    that   by   the   pilot   the 

■hip  is  guided  :  nor  doth  il  argue  that  the  Spirit  is  our  rule,  be- 

Jise  be  guides  us  according  to  the  rule ;  it  is  not  essential  to 

e  role  to  give  power  to  conform  unto  it,  but  to  be  that  aceord- 

j  lag  to  which  we  are  to  be  conformed.     And  therefore  ii  is  a 

I  «raiy  argument  to  prove  the  law  of  the  Spirit  to  be  the  rule  of 

I  onr  life,  because  it  chiefly  gives  us  power  to  conform  unto  the 

I  nle  i  for  if  the  law  be  that  according  to  which  we  are  to  be 

I  guided,  although  it  should  give  us  no  power,  yet  this  is  suHicient 

'ataake  it  lo  be  our  rule. 

n«it*  87.     The  Spirit  of  God  which  writ  the  Scriptures  and 

I'fa  them  this  rule  of  the  holy  law,  is  in  the  Scriptures,  and  in  that 

[  hw.u  well  as  in  a  believer's  heart ;  and  therefore  to  forsake  and 

reject  the  Scriptureti,  or  this  written  rule,  is  to  forsake  and  reject 

the  Holy  Spirit  speaking  in  it  as  their  rule  ;  nay,  it  is  to  forsake 

tluM  Spirit  which  is  tbe  supreme  Judge,  according  to  which  all 

privMe  ftpirit«,  nay,  all  the  actings,  dictates,  movings,  stxuikings 

i  of  God's  own  Spirit  in  us,  are  lo  be  tried,  examined,  and  judged. 

[To  the  law  and  the   testimony  was   the    voice  of   the  propb- 

)  their  day».  (Is.    viti.    20.)     The    Lord  Christ  himself 

K-Vefers  the  Jews  to  the  searching  of  Scriptures  concerning  bim- 

I  lelf.  (John  V.  39.)     The  men  of  Bereah  are  commended  .for 

I  •xamiDtng  the  lioly  and  infallible  dictates  of  God's  Spirit,  in  Paul's 

r,  according  to  wtutt  was  written  in  the  Scriptnrci  of  oA. 


■  Til*:  «\iiiiArK. 

TTt  U  therefnre  but  a  cracking  noi^  of  winOj  words  for  nny  lo 
>Miy  ttmt  tliey  open  do  gap  lo  li(«ntiouji>e^  by  renouncing  ihe 
wriittn  and  external  law  as  their  rule,  coiwideriiis  that  iliej  cleave 
to  a  more  inward  and  better  rule,  viz.,  the  luw  of  the  Spirit 
vrilliin  ;  for  (as  hnlh  been  shown)  liusy  do  indued  renounci'  the 
Holf  Spirit  speaking  in  tlie  rule,  viz.,  tbe  Irw  without,  winch, 
though  it  be  no  rule  of  ihe  Spiril,  (as  eonw  object,)  yet  it  ia  that 
rule  ac«>rding  to  wliiuli  the  Spirit  guides  us  lo  walk,  nod  bj 
which  we  are  to  judge  whether  Uie  guidance  be  the  Spirit's 
I  guidance  or  no. 

•^&!u:tU  88.  Some  Ba.y,  "  that  the  difference  between  ibe  Old 
iTeBt&meat  dispensation  and  the  New,  or  pure  gospel  and  new 
covenant,  is  tbia,  to  wit,  that  the  one,  or  that  of  Moses,  was 
a  ministry  from  without,  and  that  of  Christ  from  wilhin ;  nod 
hence  llicy  say,  that  the  mere  couunandment,  or  letter  of  Scrip- 
ture, is  not  a  law  to  a  CUriijtian  why  lie  should  walk  in  holy 
duties,  but  the  taw  written  on  our  hearts,  the  law  of  life."  But 
if  this  be  the  diifcreuce  between  the  Old  and  New  Testament 
dispensation,  l^e  niini^try  of  tlie  0\i  and  the  miuiatrjof  tbe  New, 
then  let  all  believers  burn  their  Bibles,  ood  cast  all  the  sacred 
vritiugs  of  tbe  New  Testament  and  Old  unto  spiders  and  cob- 
webs in  old  hole-s  and  comers,  aud  never  be  read,  spoken,  or 
meditated  on,  for  these  external  tbings  are  noae  of  Chrial's  iom- 
\  iUrjf  on  which  now  believers  are  to  attend  i/and  then  1  miu'- 
hllT  fthy  the  apostles  preaebed,  or  why  they  writ  the  gospel  for 
after  times,  (for  that  was  the  chief  end  nf  their  writing,  as  it  waa 
of  the  prophets  in  their  times,  Is.  xxJC.  8,)  that  men  might  be- 
lieve, and  believing  have  eternal  life,  and  know  hereby  that  tliey 
have  eternal  life.  (John  xx.  31.  1  John  v.  13.)  For  ekher 
their  writing  and  preaching  the  gospel  wm  not  an  external  aod 
outward  Kiinistry,  (which  'n  cross  lo  common  sense,)  or  it  was  not 
Christ's  ministry,  which  is  blasphemous  to  imagine ;  and  it  is  a 
Tain  shift  for  any  to  say,  that  although  it  was  Christ's  miois- 
try,  yet  it  was  his  ministfy  as  under  the  law,  aad  in  tbe  Beth,  and 
not  in  mere  glory  and  spirit ;  for  it  is  evident  that  llie  ni>OEtIo's 
preachings  and  writings  were  the  effect  of  Christ's  ascension  and 
glory,  (Epb.  iv.  8,  11,)  when  he  was  most  in  ttie  spiril,  and  had 
received  the  spirit  that  he  might  pour  it  out  by  lliii  outward 
ministry,  (Acts  ii.  33 ;)  and  it  is  a  mere  new-oothing  and  dream 
of  Master  Saltmarsh  aud  others,  to  distinguish  between  Cliriet 
in  ^sJliu^jLtid  Chrial^-ia-Uie  Spirit,  as  if  the  one  Cbrist  had  a 
diveiaejainirtqjrom  the  other  :  for  when  the  Comforter  is  come, 
fvhich  is  ChristintEeSpirif,)  what  will  he  do  ?  He  will  lead  (it 
<M  Bali)  unto  all  truth.  (John  xvi,  IS.)     But  what  tnith  will  he 

IB  onto  ?  Verily  to  no  other  (for  suh?innce)  hul  what  Christ 
B  ifae  flesh  had  spoken  ;  nnd  therefore   it  i^  said  (hnt   he   shall 

■  Wing  all  things  to  yuiir  remembrnnce,  whatsoever  I  have  said 
■imio  you,  (John  xiv.  2S ;)  nnd  therefore  (if  I  may  u.'m;  their 

te)  Chtist  in  the  Spirit  leada  us  In  v^hiir  flirwi  in  the  flesh  ' 
.  inniird  Uhrist  lcad«  the  faithful  to  the  ouEwartl  ministry  ( 
P«r  Christ ;  Christ  in  the  SpiiHt  to  Christ  speaking  in  the  leller, 
Ibe  Spirit  of  truth  to  the  word  of  truth,  the  Spirit  within  to  the 
word  without,  by  which  we  shall  be  judged  at  the  lost  ilny,  (John 
^i.  48,)  anil  therefore  certainly  are  lo  be  regulated  by  it  now.  . 
Theiit  89.     It  is  true  that  the  faithful  receive  an  unclioa  or* 
I  an  anointing  of  the  Spirit,  which  teacheth  them  all  things ;  but  ia  I 

■  this  teaching  immediate  or  mediate  ?  If  immediate,  why  doth 
E^ohn  tell  them  th»t  he  writ  to  them  that  hereby  they  might  know 
lUiey  had  eternal  liff?  (1  John  v.  13;)  but'ifit  be  mediate, 
Kvls..  by  the  word  extemaHy  prp^hpil  nr  writ,  (hen  the   eslemal 

■  trord  still  is  lo  be  our  rale,  which  the  anointing  of  the  Spirit 
ftielps  us  to  know  ;  it  is  true,  the  apostle  sailh,  (1  John  ii.  27,) 

■  4fcU  they,  being  taught  of  the  Spirit,  did  not  need  that  any  man 

■  Aould  tfoch  them :  what  then  ?  was  iheir  teaching  therefore  im- 
Vsediaie  ?     No,  verily,  fur  the  apostle  explains  his  meaning  in 

Ibe  words  following,  vix..  olh«;rwise.  and  aftt:r  another  way  and 
■■nner.  then  as  the  Spirit  taught  them,  for  no  the  words  run, 
>*  \o»  need  not  that  any  man  ehould  tearh  you,  but  as  the  anoint- 
g  l«achetb  you  all  things,  nnd  is  truth."  Fur  if  ministers  are 
9  preach  and  write  in  demonsinilion  of  the  Spirit,  then  thoee 
'  '.  hear  tbem,  and  are  taught  by  them,  need  no  man  to  teach 
B  otherwise  than  as  the  Mime  Spirit  in  the  Mime  demonstra- 
I  l«tichetU  them  nil  things.^i  might  be  truly  said  that  the 
n  of  Bereah  did  need  tio  man  to  teach  them  otherwise  than  as 
D  Spirit,  in  compai'ing  and  searching  the  Scriptures,  did  teach 
a  the  things  which  Paul  spake.  And  Calvin  well  observes 
n  ibis  plncf.  that  the  sco[ie  of  the  apostle,  in  these  words,  ia 
ifirm  hi*  doctrine  which  he  writ  to  them,  it  being  no  un- 
it tiling,  but  H  thing  known  to  them  by  the  anointing  of  the 
I,  which  either  they  had  received  by  former  ministry  of  the 
lOr  which  now  thvy  might  receive  by  this  writing  ;  as  there- 
« tlH)  Spirit  lends  us  to  the  wonl,  su  the  word  leads  us  to  the 
^  irit,  but  never  to,j8jHntjviihouiand  l>ey(md  the  word  ;  I  mean 
•  far  forth  as  that  tlie  out war3"agini!itt;init ion  nf  Clirist  in  the 
nb,  or  in  the  word,  or  letter,  mu^t  cease,  and  be  laid  aside,  when 
itiwnrd  adminiyiration  of  Christ  in  the  Spirit  come*. 
TAtli*  UU.  Il  ia  as  weak  an  argument  lo  imagine  that  we  tire  \ 
m  he  led  nnd  |[uidMl  by  any  outward  commands  iu  our  ab«-  1 

Iftccopiplish  rII  the  promises  for  us.  For,  if  the  question  be, 
TT^'iat  are  we  to  live?  Ihe  sposllc'i  nnswer  is  full,  (Gal.  ii. 
19,  20,)  thai  nil  he  did  not  live  but  hj  llic  faith  of  the  Son  of 
God,  so  are  we,  Hot  if  the  question  be.  According  to  what  rule 
are  we  to  lis-e,  and  wherein  are  we  to  live?  the  answer  is 
given  by  pHvid.  (Pa,  cxix,  4,  5.)  "  Tliou  hast  commanded  us  lo 
keep  thy  prccopla  diliscnily.  O  that  my  heart  were  directed  to 
keep  ihy  statutes.  Deal  bountifully  wiih  thy  servant,  that  I  may 
live  and  keep  thy  word."  (ver.  17.)  "  Let  thy  mercy  come  to  me, 
that  I  may  live,  for  ihy  law  ii  ray  delight."  (ver.  77.)  So  that 
if 'the  question  be,  What  is  the  rule  of  faith  by  which  we  live? 
the  answer  is,  Tim  youpml.  (Phil.  iii.  IG.)  But  if  ilie  question 
be.  What  is  Ihe  rule  of  life  itself?  the  answer  is.  The  moral 
law;  and  of  this  latter  is  the  controversy. 

^  Thtnis  91,  The  commanding  will  of  God,  called  rolimtat 
*mandali,  h  lo  be  our  rule,  and  not  the  working  will  of  God, 

■creti,  or  the  will  of  God's 
fulfilling  the  one,  but  we  may  sin    in  fulliliing  the  other. 
'God's  secret  and  working  will  was  fulfilled  when  Joseph's  breth- 
ren sold  him  into  Egypt,  and  when  Nebucliadnexzar  afflicted 
God's   people   seventy   years,   as  also   when   the   scribes    and 
Pharisees  caused  Clirist  to  be  crucified ;  yet  in  all  these  things 
a  they  sinned  and  provoked  God's  wrath  against  tlicni.     How  ? 
"  Was  it  in  crossing  and  thwarting  God's  working  will,  or  the  will 
'   of  God's  decree  ?     No,  verily,  for  it  is  expressly  said,  ihai  Christ 
was  crucified  according  to  the  determinate  counsel  and  will  ot 
God.  (Acta  iv.  28.)     It  was  therefore  by  crossing  God's  com- 
Imanding  will.     It  is  therefore  a  hellish  device  of  libertines  to 
exempt  men  from  all  law,  and  from  the  sense  of  all  sin._   Be- 
I    cause  (say  they)  all  things  good  and  evil  come  from  God's  will, 
and  all  things  tlml  are  done  are  wrought  by  him,  and  all  that 
be  doth  is  good,  and  therefore  all  sinful  actions  are  good,  because 
God  works  ihem  :  tor  what  have  we  lo  do  to  lake  the  measure 
of  our  ways  by  his  working  will  ?     God's  will  is  his  own  rule  to 
wprk  with,  not  our  rule  toworkjjy.     Our  actions  may  be  most 
I  BinHil,  when  Iiis  working  ui  and  about  these  may  be  most  just 
'^  and  holy ;  for  though  God  purgioseth  to  leave  the  creature  lo  fall 
,.  and  sin,  yet  he  so  purposed  it  as  lliat  it  should  be  only  through 
VthuF  "^'o  ^i*"l'  >'»"  *'<'  '''^y  s'"-     ^"^  although  a  Christian  is 
Ho  labmU  humbly  to  tha  just  diaptosaiioua  of  GU>d  wltea  ht 

THE    tlOml-ITr    < 

Imtm  ii 

vil,  yd  God'it  working  will 
be  our  rule,  for  tben  we  m 
AwD  sin,  but  our  own  a&liciioa  nnd  penli 
these  are  coninjneil  under  hii  working  will 
\t  gutitle  and  pernicious  practiuu  in  many 
\  0%-ertaken  wiih  any  ain,  or  hampered 

ATH.  91 

in  all  snch  dispen- 
<il  will  nol  only  our 
on  forever;  for  all 
It  is  therefore  a 
who,  when  they  are 
I,  they  wash  all  off 
.  from  tliemselves,  and  lay  all  tliC  blame  (if  any  be)  upon  God 
'  himself,  ^ayiDg,  The  Lord  lelt  me.  and  he  doih  not  help  me, 
I  and  be  must  do  all.  and  halh  undertaken  lo  do  all ;  if  therefore 
upon  him  be  the  blame ;  or  if  there  be  any  upon  tlieni,  it  la 
but  little.  But  why  should  any  judge  of  the  evil  of  their  sin  by 
God*«  working  will  ?  forthat  is  not  your  rule,  but  the  commanding 
will  of  tied  ;  according  lo  which  Samuel  convinced  Saul  (when 
he  was  left  of  God  to  spare  Agng)  Uiat  his  digobedicnce  agmnst 
tbe  commnndraeni  was  rebellion,  and  aa  the  sin  of  wilchcraA  in 
e  eyes  of  G«l.  (1  Sum.  iv.  23.) 

T^Mi'f  92.  It  is  a  great  part  of  Christ's  love  lo  command  us 
lo  do  any  thing  for  him,  as  well  as  to  promise  to  do  any  thing 
When  the  King  of  glory  halh  given  ua  our  lives  by 
promise,  it  is  then  the  next  part  of  his  Bi«cial  grace  and  favor 
to  roiumnnd  us  lo  »Iand  before  him  and  attend  upon  his  greal- 
iiiinually.  They  ihat  see  how  justly  Ihey  deserve  to  be 
forsaken  of  God,  and  given  over  lo  their  own  hearts'  lusts,  and 
to  be  forever  sinning  and  blaspheming  God  in  hell,  where  God 
vill  never  command  ihem  to  think  of  him,  «peak  of  him,  do  for 
ilim,  pray  to  him  more,  can  not  but  acooani  it  a  high  and  special 
"  fcvor  of  Jesus  Christ  to  command  them  any  thing,  or  bid  them 
my  thing  for  him  ;  a  poor,  humbled  prodigal  will  account  it 
great  love  to  be  made  a  hired  servant :  John  Baptist  will  count 
it  a  high  favor  if  ho  may  but  untie  Christ's  shoe  lalchet,  anH  be 
commanded  by  him  lo  do  the  meanest  work  for  him:  David 
wondered  at  God's  grace  Inward  him,  flial  God  should  command 
him,  and  in  some  measure  enable  him  to  offer  willingly  :  *■  Lord, 
(saith  he)  what  ore  we  ?  "     1  clo  thi^refore  marvel  how  any  can 

Ereiend  that  ihey  are  acted  by  the  luvc  uf  Christ,  and  not  by  Ihe  i 
iw  of  commands,  considering  thai  there  is  so  much  love  tn 
a  for  Christ  to  i»ramnnd,  and  how  they  can  profess  their  relish 
I  of  preaching  God's  free  grate  and  love,  and  yei  can  not  away 
y  with  iwcet  and  gracious  exhortations  pressing  lo  holiness  and  . 
f  holy  duitet,  in  the  revealing  and  urging  of  which  there  is  so  * 
I  Buch  firee  grace  and  heart  love  of  Christ  Jesus :  snrely  if  [he 
I  IvTC  of  Christ  is  to  lead  us,  llien  the  commands  of  Christ  (wl 
I  ID  hs  disovvers  one  chief  pari  of  his  love)  are  to  guide  us, 
a  ml*  of  life  unto  us.     Tha  man  who  in  bis  cog)  aod 



s.  and         H 

dalib-         ■ 


t  orate  thouglilB  imagines  that  a  ChrUtran  under  the  rule  of  ihe 
[  law  ia  a  Christian   unJpr  boiidti^,  may  be  juslly  feared  that 
biiai«If  is  Btill  under  the  I>ondn)i;e  of  sin  and  Salan,  and  never 
yet  knew  what  ihe  true  love  of  Christ  Jesus  is  to  this  day- 

I-  '  Thetit  93.     The  fundamental  error  of  Anttiiomians  ariselh 
from  this  —  in  imagiiiiDg  the  great  difTerence  between  (he  law 
,   and  gospel  lo  be   this,  viz.,  that  the  law   requires  doing,  but 
tlie  gospel  no  doing,  and  that  all  believers,  being  under  "'- '  — 


e  Hierelore  under  no  law  of  doing ;  but  we  raust  knt 
thai,  na  the  gos]iel  esaets  rio'Hoingrihal  thereby  we  may  be  just, 
so  it  requires  doing  also  when  by  Christ  Jesus  we  are  made 

Must.  I  For  if  the  gospel  eommand  us  lo  be  holy  as  God  is  holy, 

'T  (I*  Pet.  i.  15,1  and  perfect  aa  our  heavenly  Father  is  perfect, 

(Matt.  V.  48,)  then  the  goiipel  doth  not  only  require  doing,  but 

'  ntEb  as  much  perfection  of  doing  as  the  law  dolh  ^thc  law  and 
the  p>spcl  require  the  same  perfection  of  holiness,  only  here  is 
ihe  difference,  (which  many  have  not  observed :)  (he  gospel  doll) 
not  urgeJiis  perfection,  nor  require  it  of  us  as  the  Jaw  doth; 
for  the  law  calling  and  urging  of  it  ihnt  so  hereby  we  may  be 
made  jusf.lrilierefore  accepts  of  nbiKing  but  perfection  ;  but  the 
gospel  requiring  it  because  we  are  perft-ctly  just  already  in 
Christ,  hence,  though  it  commands  ua  as  much  as  the  law,  yet 
it  accepts  of  less,  even  the  least  measure  of  sincerity  and  per- 
fection mixed  with  the  greatest  measure  of  imperfection. 
^FJiesit  94.     The  law  (say  some  of  the  Antinoroians)  is  lo  be 

I  kept  as  an  eternal  rule  of  righteousness ;  but  their  meaning  then 
i.S  (hnt  believers  nre  thus  to  keep  it  in  Christ,  who  linth  kept  it 
for  Ihera,  and  if  they  meant  no  more  but  ihat  Christ  bath  kept  it 
lor  righteousness  to  their  justitication,  they  speak  truly ;  but 
their  meaning  herein  is  not  only  in  respect  of  their  justification, 
but  alao  in  respect  of  their  sanciificalion  ;  for  ihey  make  Christ's 
righteousness  to  be  materially  and  formally  their  sanclificBlion  : 
hence  tbcy  sny,  A  believer  hatb  repented  in  Christ,  and  mor- 
tified Bin  in  Christ,  and  that  morlilicalion  and  vivificalion  are 
nothing  but  a  l>elieving  ihat  Christ  hath  morlificd  sin  for  them, 
Hnd  been  quickened  for  thein,  and  that  that  sanctifl cation  which 
is  inherent  in  Cbrisi,  and  not  that  which  is  inherent  in  us,  is  an 
evidence  of  our  justifieaiion.  But  this  principle,  which  confounds 
a  Christian's  juf^tilleution  and  sand ificat ion.  aa  it  casu  the  seed 
of  denying  all  inherent  graces  in  a  believer,  so  it  luy^  the  basis 
of  refusing  lo  do  any  duly,  or  conform  to  any  law  in  our  own 
persons  ;  for  if  this  principle  be  true,  (which  no  orthodox  writer 
doubts  of,)  viz.,  thai  we  aj'e  to  seek  for  no  righteousness  in  our- 
ielvea  to  our  juiililication,  because  we  are  perfectly  just  aud 


made  righteous  for  that  end  in  Christ,  then  it  will  undeniably 
foUoWy  that  we  are  not  to  seek  for  any  holiness  and  sanctification 
in  ourselves,  because  we  are  perfectly  sanctified  also  in  Christ 
Jesus,  who  hath  repented,  and  believed,  and  mortified  sin  per- 
fectly for  us  in  his  own  person ;  look,  therefore,  as  the  perfection 
of  Christ's  righteousness  to  our  justification  should  make  a 
Christian  abhor  any  personal  righteousness  of  his  own  to  his 
justification,  so  if  we  be  perfectly  sanctified  in  Christ,  then  per- 
fection of  Christ's  holiness  to  our  sanctification  should  make  a 
believer  not  only  renounce  the  law,  but  to  abhor  all  personal 
hotiness  through  the  Sprrit  to  our  sanctification,  and  then  a 
believer  must  abhor  to  seek  any  love  or  fear  of  God  in  his  heart, 
which  is  not  painted  but  profesiBed  pro&neness,  and  the  inlet, 
per  aeeidem^  but  per  4e,  to  all  manner  of  kxMeness  and  wicked 
Bess  IB  the  world.  ~ 

ThewU  ^5.     We  deny  not  but  that  Christ  is  our  sanctification 
as  well  as  our  righteousness,  (1  Cor.  i.  30 ;)  bat  how  ?    Not  ni»- 
terially  Bi^  frMfnAlly^  but  virtually  and  roeritorionslv,  and  {with 
Bleat  expliciUioBs)  exemplarily  ;  our  rigbteousneBa  to  onr  juatifU 
eation  is  iaherent  in  him,  but  our  saS5ificatioB  ip  inhArpnf  in 
oorselvcg,  yet  it  is  derived  from  him,  and  therefore  «t  is  virtually 
aod  meritoriously  only  in  him ;  and  hence  it  is  that  we  are  never  I 
oommaBded  to  justify  ourselves,  unless  it  be  instrumentally  emA  { 
sacnunentanyJwfaenas  we  are  commanded  by  faith  to  wash  our-  | 
ael^-es,  (Is.  i.  16,)  aod*as  Fknl  at  his  baptism  was  commanded  ^||> 
wash  away  his  sins,  (Acts  xxiL  16;)  ^ut  we  are  frequently  aiMA 
aboBdaatly  exhorted  to  repent,  believe,  mortify  our  aifisctions   \ 
Bpoa  earth,  to  walk  in  newness  of  life,  to  be  holy  in  all  manner    I 
of  ootrversation,  etc.,  because  these  things  are  wrought  by  Christ    j 
in  OS  to  our  sanctification,  and  not  wrought  in  Chnst  for  us  as    ( 
our  rigfateoBsness  to  our  justification.  — -'' 

TlsM  96.  They  that  are  in  Christ  are  said  to  be  complete  in 
Christ,  (Col.  iL  10,)  and  that  they  receive  all  grace  from  his 
fillnest,  (John  L  16  ;)  so  that  it  seems  that  there  is  no  grace  in 
themselves,  but  it  is  first  in  him,  and  consequently  tlmt  their 
sanctification  is  perfected  in  him ;  but  we  must  know,  that  though 
the  perfection  and  fullness  of  all  grace  is  first  in  Christ,  yet  that 
believers  have  not  all  in  him  alW  one  and  the  same  manner,  nor 
for  the  tame  end ;  lor  our  righteousness  to  our  justification  is  so 
in  him  as  never  to  be  inherent  in  us,  in  this  or  in  the  world  to  . 
ooroe ;  but  our  righteousness  t6  our  sanctification  is  so  far  in  him, 
as  that  it  is  derived  and  conveyed  unto  us,  and  hence  it  is 
formally  in  ourselves,  but  meritoriously  aod  virtually  only  in 
him ;  even  as  our  resurrection  and  glorification  at  last  day  are 

.      04  THK    JUlHAMTV    OK    TllK    SAUIlATtf. 

LBOt  H>  in  Chrin  as  never  lo  bi?  ilvrivvd  to  us  (for  ihen  tlic  resur- 
rection were  past  alrtudy.)  but  lliey  are  *o  in  him  as  that  (hey  are 
,  to  be  conveyed  lo  us,  anil  thei'efoi'c  tht:y  are  mentorinuEly  anil 

""■rirtunlly  in  him,  and  we  are  meritoriously  and  viiiually  risen  in 
him :  a  Christian  therefore  may  be  comgiletu  in  Christ,  and  yet 
not  be  perfectly  formally  sanetified  in  Christ,  our  aanclifiualioii 
being  completed  in  hira  after  another  manner,  and  for  other  ends 
than  our  ju^tilicatioa. 

TAetis  97.  The  thief  end  of  Christ's  first  coming  was  to  lay 
down  his  life  a  ransoin  for  many  in  way  of  salistaction  and  merik 
(Phil,  ii,  8.  Matt.  XX.  28.)  Now.  by  this  satisfaction  he  did  two 
things:  ].  He  brought  in  such  a  righteousness  before  God  as 
might  merit  rocrcv  and  make  us  Just.  Now,  this  is  wholly  in 
Christ  out  of  ourselves  ;  but  because  there  was  a  righleousnesa 
of  new  obedience  and  thankfulness  to  be  wrought  in  us  for  this 
love,  therefore,  2.  By  the  same  satisfaction  he  hath  merited,  not 
that  this  new  obedience  might  justify  us  or  make  us  accepted, 
but  that  it  might  be  accepted  though  imperfect  and  polluted  with 
sin,  (1  Pet.  ii.  A,  6,)  as  also  that  it  might  be  crowned  and  rec- 
ompensed. Now,  hence  it  follows,  that  the  Lord  Jesus  hath  not 
performed  our  duty  of  thankfulness  and  new  obedience  for  us, 
iui  hoc  fornudi,  or  as  of  thankfulness;  for  though  Christ  was 
thankful  and  holy  for  us,  yet  it  was  not  under  this  notion  of 
thankfulness  for  his  own  love  to  us,  for  this  is  personally  required 
of  us,  and  it  sounds  very  harsh  to  say  that  Christ  walked  in  all 
holy  thankfulness  lo  himself,  for  his  love  lo  us ;  but  he  was  thus 
thankful  for  us,  «t(i  rati'one  merili,  or  in  way  of  merit,  it  being 
part  of  that  satisfaction  which  justjce  eicacled.  All  that  which 
might  satisfy  justice,  and  merit  any  mercy,  Christ  did  for  us  in 
Iiimself ;  but  he  did  not  believe  and  repent,  and  perform  duties  of 
thankfulness  for  us,  because  these  and  such  like  are  not  to  satisfy 
justice,  but  follow  as  fruits  of  timt  satisfaction,  and  therefore  are 
wrought  within  us,  and  so  are  personally  required  of  us ;  and 
therefore,  when  a  Christian  finds  a  want  of  these  things  in  him- 
self, he  is  not  to  comfort  himself  with  fond  tlioughis  of  the  impu- 

UtOtion  of  these  in  Christ  only  unto  him,  but  he  is  to  look  up  to 

"Christ  Jesus  for  derivation  of  these  out  of  Christ  into  himself; 
othenvise,  by  making  Christ  his  sanctifi cation,  only  in  way  of  im- 
putation, he  doth  really  destroy  Christ  from  being  his  sanctifica- 
tion ;  for  if  Christ  be  our  righteousness  only  by  imputation,  then 
if  Christ  be  our  sanctification,  it  must  be  by  derivation  from  him, 
•which  they  must  needs  destroy  who  make  him  their  sole  sancti- 
£cation  by  mere  imputation. 

'T  '  iTiesi*  98.    Spirilualerror3,likestrong  wine,  make  men's  judg- 

rni;  jiohalitt  i 


Imntsreel  and  stagger,  who  are  drunken  thercwiili ;  and  hence 

~  e  Antinomians  ii|>eak  so  variously  in  llits  point,  that  we  knov 

It  whtre  to  find  tbein,  or  what  tbej  will  stand  ro ;  for  eometimg 

I  Ihey  will  say  that  a  believer  is  free  fi-om  the  kw  in  all  : 

I  Ihority  and  officer;  but  this  being  loo  gross,  at  other  tiroes  they 

I  af)e>k  more  warily,  and  allinn  that  a  Cliritllan  is  to  observe  the 

T  Uw  aa  his  rule  personally,  thus  f»r  forth,  viz.,  to  do  n 

Buinded,  but  not  in  virtue  of  a  command :  the  Spirit,  say  they, 

will  bind  and  conform  their  hearts  to  the  law,  but  they  are  not 

[  bound  by  any  authority  of  the  law  to  the  direcliona  thereof;  the 

I  Spirit,  they  aay,  la  free,  and  they  nre  under  the 

I  iBc  Spirit,  which  is  not  to  be  controlleil  and  ruled  by  any  law. 

i  Now,  if  by  virtue  of  a  command  they  mennt  by  virtue  of  our  J 

l-awn  nMoral  strength  and  abilities  looking  to  the  command,  i 

I  In  true  that  a  believer  is  not  so  bound  to  acl  by  virtue  of  the  law, . 

r  for  then  he  was  bound  to  conlbrm  to  the  law  pharisaically ;  fori 

I  what  ia  our  strength  but  weaknesa  and  sin  ?  I  But  if  by  i ' 

I  a  noibmnnd  they  mean  thn^  much,  vix.,  that  a  believe 

I  boDud  by  the  commanding  power  of  any  law  to  conform  there* 

tinlu.  only  the  Spirit  will  conform  his  heait  thereunto,  go  that  be 

•hull  do  the  things  (perhaps)  which  the  law  requires,  but  not 

I  fatjnui^  the  law  re<]uirea  or  eoramands  them  to  be  done.     If  this, 

I  I  (aj*.  be  their  meaning,  (its  surely  it  seems  Ui  be,)  then  the  mya- 

I  lery  of  this  iniquity  is  so  plain,  that  he  that  runs  may  I'ead  it. 

m  Far  lience  it  undeniably  followa,  that   in  case  a  believer  fall 

t  any  &in  of  whoredom,  murder,  theft,  witchcratY,  etc.,  these 

I  wicked  acts,  tliough  they  be  sins  in  themselves,  (because  Uiey 

I  are  against  ihe  Inw,)  yet  they  are  not  sins  unto  him,  because  ho 

frit  iKrw  act  free  from  the  law,  and  not  bound  to  the  obedience  of 

It  by  virtue  of  any  command ;  for  where  there  is  no  law,  there  is 

■O  transgrestion,  and  if  there  be  no  law  which  binds  him,  there 

it  no  tnuugrewton  then  at  least  unto  him.     They  are  sins  indeed 

a  tbemaelves,  but  not  unio  him ;  they  are  sins  (as  some  say)  to 

but  not  to  faith  ;  sins  in  the  conversation,  but  r 

r:  sins  before  men,  (because  they  may  cross  their 

ts  before  God,  who  exempla  them  from  all  law.     And  i__ 

n  liBRj  lo  reply,  llmt  they  may  be  sins  to  him,  because  tlicy^ 

,.  be  against  ibc  law  of  the  Spirit  which  is  his  rule;  for  wo 

Bbtve  already  sMwn,  that  although  the  Spirit  be  the  principle  by 

t  to  con-  I 
aws,)  but  I 
And  it  id  J 





ivhieh  we  oli|(^,  jet 

r  Mile  iiceording  to  which  we 

mtn  to  obej^  Indeed,  it  is  a  high  aggravation  o 

nat  ib«  .Spirit;  but  In  cross  the  .Spirit  doth  not  firstly  make 

e  things  sinful,  nor  could  they  lie  sins  unless  they  cross  such 

e  holy  law,  the  very  essence  of 



sin  lying  in  Ihe  transgression,  not  o£jU)jJi!Wi_kil.lJl£jbsJaffi.  '■  e-i 
the  knamLmoral  cir^yiiiigelicai  law.  Again ;  if  thme  and  such 
lilte  he  sins,  becHuse  they  are  only  agninst  the  law  of  [he  Spirit, 
then  it  is  no  sin  to  bow  down  before  an  image,  to  commit  SIthi- 
ness,  theft,  etc.,  eupposting  tliat  the  Spirit  sliall  siinpend  his  act, 
and  not  restrain  ;  nay,  then  it  will  follow,  that  sins  of  ignonuicft 
(uf  which  Ihe  Spirit  hath  not  convinced  a.  Christian)  are  no  bIdb, 
nur  to  be  repented  of,  which  is  expressly  cross  to  the  holy  pmc- 
liue  of  David :  "  Who  knows  his  errors  ?  Lord,  cleanse  me  from 
my  aepret  sins."  If  sin  therefore  be  tho  Iranspression  of  the  law, 
(whether  the  Spirit  work  upon  a  Christian  or  no.)  then  certainly, 
if  he  he  under  no  commanding  power  of  the  law,  he  can  not  be 
gnilty.  or  be  eaid  to  commit  tiny  sin  ;  and  liien  the  conclusion  is 
this,  that  every  believer  neither  hath  sin,  or  should  say  he  doth 
stOi  no,  not  when  he  commits  murder,  adultery,  and  the  foulest 
I  enorroilies  in  the  world  :  wliifh  doctrine,  though  so  directly  and 
expressly  aguinst  the  light  of  Scripture,  the  coufeMions  of  all  the 
Hints,  yea,  of  the  light  of  nature  and  common  sense,  and  is  the 
TCry  fllih  of  the  froth  of  the  fume  of  the  tiotlomless  pit,  yet  some 

nBere  are  who  are  not  oEhamed  to  own  ii,|the  very  jSoflo;  and 
depth  of  a  perfect  Familist  consisting  in  this,  viz.,  when  a  man 
Cftn  sin  and  never  feci  it,  or  have  any  remorse  or  soitow  for  ii, 
snd  when  one  hath  attained  to  this  measure,  he  is  then  deified, 
and  then  lb»'y  profess  the  Godhead  doth  prtere  fimdum  anima, 
(ae  ihey  call  it.)  when  believing  thai  he  hath  no  sin,  he  can 
therefore  neitlier  see  it  nor  feel  it.  From  which  depth  of  dark- 
ness the  God  and  Faliier  of  mercies  deliver  his  poor  people  in 
these  oomipling  times,  and  I  wish  that  those  who  defend  this 
kind  of  B  believer's  immunity  from  the  law  did  not  lay  this  cor- 
ner stone  of  hell  and  perdition  to  their  followers.  I  am  sure 
they  lead  them  hereby  lo  liie  month  of  this  pit,  who,  upon  this 
principle,  refuse  either  to  mourn  for  sin,  or  pray  tor  pardon  of 
ain,  or  to  imagine  that  Goil  alllicls  for  sin,  being  now  freed  from 

I  the  mandatory  power  of  any  law  of  God,  they  being  now  not 

I  bound  to  act  by  virtue  of  any  command.  ^ 

lltetit  'J9.     If  God  did  work  upon  believerB  as  upon  blocks  or 
brute  creatures,  they  miglit  then  liave  some  color  to  cast  off  all 

'  ftttendance  to  the  directive  power  of  the  law,  and  so  leave  all  to 
the  Spirit's  omnipotent  and  immediate  acta ;  as  the  stars,  which 
being  irrational  and  incapable  of  acting  by  any  rule,  they  are 
therefore  acted  and  run  their  course  by  the  mighty  woi-d  of  God'a 
power,  and  therefure  attend  no  rule ;  but  believers  are  rational 

I  oreotures,  aod  therefore  capable  of  acting  by  rule,  and  tliey  are 
also  sanctified  and  delivered  from  the  power  of  their  corrupt 

A  tbererorc  have  gome  ialii^rent  power  fto  lo  net ;  for  if 
v  deati  in  treE|)Bsscs  and  sins,  ihey  Lave  then 
p.  life,  and  therefore  some  inherent  power  to  act,  accord' 
J  to  the  rule  of  life :  the   image  of  Go<l,  renewed  in  them,  is 
■  part)  like  to  the  same  image  which  they  hud  in  the  lirat  erea- 
m,  which  ^ve  <mui  some  liberty  and  power  lo  act  accoating Jo 
t  will  of  Him  that  creatt^  htm.  /  And  if  the  first  Adam,  b;  hjs 
anveys  to  ui,  not  only  coodera nation ,  but  ubo  an  inherent 
r  of  coiTupiion,  then  the  second  Ailara,  the   Lord  Jesuii, 
more  conveys  unio  all  his   posterity,  not  only  juatilitiulion, 
II  also  »ontc  inherent  power  of  grace  and  holiness,  which  id 
■gun  here,  and  perfeeted  in  glory ;  for  as  sin  hath  abound ed.  so 
'>'*'.  nboundcth  much  more:   and    yet  suppose   lliey  had  no"' 
il  power  tliuii  to  act,  yet  they  have  an  adherent  power,  tlie 
J  Christ  Jesus,  by  faith  in  whose. name  they  may  nnd  shJL 
e  power  to  act     And  therefore/all  hough  Goil  works  in  us  | 
9  will  and  lo  do  of  his  good  pleasure,  yet  this  hinders  not  I 
i  that  we  are  lo  work  out  our  salraiion  with  fear  and  trem-  1 
ig,  by  attending  ilie  rule,  by  virtue  of  which  we  are  bound  to  I 
Brk,  both  by  pulling  forth  that  power  which  we  have  already  I 
soi'tid  from  God,  as  also  in  fetching  in  that  power  we  have  not  | 
I  receivetl,  but  is  reserved  daily  in  Christ's  bands  for 
IS  ihcreunio. 

I  100.     If  they  that  say  a  believer  is  not  lo  act  by  virtus 

n  ooRimand  do  mean   ibis  only,  vii.,  ihat   he   is   not  to  act  by 

s  of  tJie  bare  letter  and  external  words  and  syllables  of  it, 

J  tiuM  speak  truly ;  for  such  kind  of  acting  is  rather  witchery 

in  ChrisUauity,  to  place  power  and  virtue  in  bare  characters 

il  lo(l«r«i  which,  though  mighty  and  powerful  by  the  Spirit,  yet 

mp(y  and  powerless  without  it.     But  if  their  meaning  be, 

re  aro  not  to  act  by  virtue  of  any  command  in  any  sense, 

a  llin  iisacrtioji  is  both  jiemicious  and  perilous ;  for  the  Lord 

I  bning  the  rttfinay  dE/ati>Di',  or  lirsl  subject  of  all  grace 

i  gracious  efficacy  and  power,  hence  it  is  true,  wo  are  not  tu 

*  e  tlio  command  of  God  the  first  principle  of  our  obedieore, 

hi*  it  proper  unto  Cbrifet  by  the  Spirit.   (John  v.  40  ;  x\i.  13, 

2  Tim.  iu  1.     Eph.  vi.  10.     llom.  viii.  2.)     But  because 

t  Lord  JwuA  conveys  by  bis  Spirit  virtue  and  efficacy  through 

it  word,  not  only  words  of  promise,  but  also  words  of  command, 

ia  ovtdcnl,  Jer.  iii,  2:2;  Acts  ii.  3H.  41  i  Matt.  ix.  9;  Ps. 

.  ft.)  hence  il  is    that   a    believer   is  bound  to  act  from  a 

md,  though  not  as  from  a  first,  yet  as  from  a  second  prin- 

>t  OS  from  the  first  efficient,  yet  as  from  an  instru- 

1  the  hand  uf  Christ,  who  in  commanding  of  the  duly 

s,  lol 







works  bj-'ii,  and  enables  li 
comes  out  of  liU  own  rount 
God  to  follow  him  be  kt 
Peter  ccut  his  net  ii 

;  aiid  therefore  we  see  Abraham 
because  called  and  commiinded  of 
iibt  whithev.  (Heb.  si.  8.)  And 
raerelj  because  he  was  command- 
ed. (Luke  V.  5.)  And  Dnvid  deaired,  O  that  my  heart  were 
directed  to  keep  thy  precepts,  because  God  had  commanded. 
(Ts.  cxix.  45.)  There  is  n  virtue,  a  m  or  efhcacy  in  the  final 
cause,  as  well  as  in  the  efficient,  to  produce  the  efTect,  and  every 
wise  agent  is  bound  to  Act  by  virtue  or  for  the  sake  of  his 
utmost  and  last  end.  Now,  the  naked  commandment  of  the  Lord 
may  be  and  should  be  the  chief  motive  and  last  end  of  our  obedi- 
ence to  his  highness;  for  whalever  is  done  merely  because  of 
God's  command  is  done  for  his  glory,  (which  glory  should  be  our 
utmost  end  in  all  our  obedience ;)  and  hence  it  is  that  that  obe- 
dience is  most  absolute  and  sincere  (whether  it  be  in  doing  or 
suffering  the  will  of  God)  which  is  done  merely  in  respect  of 
commandment  and  will  of  God;  when  the  soul  can  truly  say. 
Lord,  I  should  never  submit  to  such  a  yoke  but  merely  for  thy 
Bake,  and  because  it  is  thy  will,  and  thou  dost  command  it.  What 
is  it  to  love  Christ  but  to  seek  lo  please  bim,  aud  lo  give  con- 
tentment to  bim  ?  What  is  it  to  seek  to  give  contentment  to 
him  hut  to  give  contentment  to  his  heart  or  his  will  ?  And  what 
is  his  will  but  the  will  of  his  commandment  ?  If  therefore  it  be 
unlawful  to  act  by  virtue  of  a  command,  then  it  is  unlawful,  1.  To 
love  Christ;  2.  To  be  sincere  before  Christ;  S.  Or  to  act  for 
the  glory  of  Christ.  And  hence  it  is,  that,  let  a  man  do  the  most 
glorious  things  in  the  world  out  of  his  own  supposed  good  end, 
^aa  the  blind  Papists  do  in  their  will  works  and  aupersli lions,) 
which  God  never  commanded,  nay,  let  him  do  all  things  which 
the  law  of  God  requires,  give  his  goods  lo  the  poor,  and  his  body 
to  be  burnt,  and  yet  not  do  these  things  because  commanded,  let 
him  then  quit  himself  from  hypocrisy  and  himself  fi-om  being 
R  deep  hypocrite  in  all  tliese  if  he  can.  Surely  those  who 
strain  at  this  gnnt,  viz.,  not  to  do  a  duty  because  commanded, 
will  make  no  bones  of  swallowing  down  this  eameU  viz.,  not  to 
forsake  sin  because  it  is  forbidden ;  and  whosoever  shall  forsake 
gin  from  any  other  ground  shows  manifestly  hereby  that  he  buili 
little  conscience  of  God's  command.  I  know  the  love  of  Christ 
should  make  a  Christiiin  forsake  every  sin ;  but  the  last  resolution 
and  reason  thereof  is,  because  his  love  forbids  us  to  continue  in 
«D ;  for  to  act  by  virlue  of  a  command  is  not  to  act  only  as  a 

God  considered  as  a  Creator,  but  by  virtue  of  the  w 
Hid  commandment  of  God  in  a  Redeemer,  with  whom  a  believer 
bath  n 

Till:   UORALITY    OF  THK   SAOUATII.  99 

TTtttit  101.  To  act  tlier^fore  by  virtue  of  a  commtmd,  and  by 
virtue  of  Christ'^  Spirit,  are  subordinate  one  to  another,  not 
opposite  one  against  another,  us  tbese  men  carry  it ;  this  cau- 
lU>n  being  ever  remembered,  that  eunh  acting  be  not  to  make 
oiir«elved  just,  but  because  we  are  already  just  in  Christ  j  not 
tlial  hereby  we  might  get  life,  but  becuuse  we  have  life  given  us 
already ;  not  to  jwcify  God's  justice,  but  to  pleaae  his  m' 
being  i>acified  toward  us  by  Christ  already ;  for  nspunius 
observes  a  great  difference  between  plaoare  Deum  and  place, 
Dto,  i.  e.,  between  pacifying  God  and  pleasing  God,  for  Christ'e 
blood  only  can  pacify  justice  when  it  is  provoked,  but  when  i 
veuging  justice  ia  pacified,  mercy  may  be  pleased  with  the  b 
cere  and  humble  obedience  of  eons./(Col.  i.  It).  Heb.  xiii.  2 
When  n  believer  'm  once  justified,  he  can  not  be  made  more  ji 
by  nil  his  obedience,  nor  less  just  by  all  his  sins  in  point  ofjusti- 
ficnlion,  which  is  perfected  at  once ;  but  he  who  is  perfectly  just- 
ified li  but  impeiTectly  sanctified,  and  in  this  respect  may  more 
or  leas  please  God  or  displease  him,  be  more  just  or  less  just  and 
holy  before  him.  It  is,  I  confess,  a  secret  bat  a  common  sin  it 
many  to  seek  to  pacify  God  (when  they  perceive  or  fear  hli 
anger)  by  some  obedience  of  their  own,  and  m)  to  seek  for  that  in 
Ihenuclvej  chieily  which  they  should  seek  for  in  Christ,  and  for 
ttuit  in  the  law  which  is  onlf  to  be  found  in  the  gospel ;  but 
eorrupl  practices  in  others  should  not  breed,  as  usually  they  do, 
corrupt  opinions  in  us,  and  to  cast  off  the  law  from  being  a  rule 
of  pleasing  God,  because  it  is  no  rule  to  us  of  pacifying  of  God, 
For  if  we  speak  of  revenging  (not  fatherly)  anger,  Christ's 
blood  con  only  pacify  iliat,  and  when  that  is  pacified  and  God 
in  MUisfied,  our  obedience  now  pleaseth  him,  and  his  mercy 
Accepts  it  as  very  pleasing,  the  rule  of  which  is  the  precious  law 
of  God. 

7%ait  102.  They  that  say  the  law  is  our  rule  as  it  is  given 
by  Chmt.  but  not  as  it  was  given  by  Moses,  do  speak  niceties,  at 
l«ut  ambiguities ;  for  if  the  Lord  Christ  give  the  law  to  a  be- 
liever as  his  rule,  why  should  any  then  raise  a  dust,  and  allirm 
that  the  law  i^  not  our  rule  ?  For  the  law  may  be  considered 
cither  materially,  or  in  itself,  as  it  contains  the  matter  of  the  \ 
ooveiuuit  of  works;  and  thus  considered,  a  believer  is  not  to  bo. I 
reguUtcd  by  it,  for  he  is  wholly  free  from  it  as  a  covenant  of 
lifn  i  Of  it  may  be  considered  finally,  or  rather  relatively,  as  it 
Mnod  in  relation  and  reference  unto  the  people  of  the  God  of 
AlmthMU,  who  were  already  under  Abraliain's  covenant,  which 
«ru  a  covenant  of  free  gnux,  vie.,  "  to  be  his  God,  and  the  God 
ofbit  Med."  (Gen.  xvii.  7.)     And  in  this  Utter  respect,  the  law, 




Hit  wfis  girttn  by  Mosys,  was  given  by  Christ  in  Mosc?,  and  ibere- 
fiire  tbe  rule  of  love  toward  mail  (commanded  by  Moses)  is 
called  the  law  of  Christ.  (GrI.  vi.  2.)  For  the  law,  as  it  van 
applieil  lo  this  people,  doth  not  run  tbas,  viz.,  "  Do  all  thia,  and 
then  I  will  be  your  God  and  Redeemer,"  (for  this  is  n  covenant  of 
works.)  but  thus,  viz.,  "  I  am  the  Lord  thy  God,"  {vit.,  by  Abra- 
ham's covenant,)  "  who  brought  tiiee  ont  of  the  land  of  Egypt 
and  house  of  bondage ;  therefore  thou  sbalt  do  all  this."  If  there- 
fore the  law  ddivered  by  Moses  was  delivered  by  Christ  in 
Moses,  then  there  is  no  reason  to  set  Christ  and  Moses  together 
by  the  ears,  in  this  respect  I  now  spet^  of,  and  to  aHim]  that  the 
law,  not  as  dehvered  by  Moses,  but  aa  given  by  Christ,  is  our 
few  and  rule. 

TXmiV  103.  The  law  therefore  which  contains  in  itself  absolute- 
ly considered  (which  Lulher  calls  filoses  Mosissirans)  the  cove- 
nant of  works,  yet  relatively  considered  as  it  yas  delivered  by 
Moses  to  a  people  under  u  covenant  of  grace,  (which  the  same 
author  calls  Moses  Aaronicus,)  so  it  ia  not  to  be  considered  only 
as  a  covenant  of  works,  and  therefore  for  any  to  nffirm  that  the 
law  is  no  covenant  of  works,  as  it  is  delivered  on  Mount  Sion, 
snd  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  that  it  is  a  covenant  of  works  only,  as 
it  is  delivered  on  Mount  Sinai,  and  by  Moses,  is  a  bold  assertion, 
both  unsafe  and  unsound  ;  for  if,  affit  was  delivered  on  Mount  Si- 
nai, it  was  delivered  to  a  people  nnder  a  covenant  of  grace,  then 
it  was  ool  delivered  to  lliem  only  as  a  covenant  of  works,  for 
then  ft  people  under  a  covenant  of  grace  may  again  come  under 
K  covenant  of  works,  to  disaniitd  that  covenant  of  grace ;  but 
the  apostle  expressly  affirms  the  qaite  contrary,  and  sbows  that 
the  covenant  tnade  with  Abraham  and  his  seed,  (which  was  to  be 
a  God  to  them,  Gen.  xvii.  7,)  and  which  was  conflrmed  before  of 
God  in  Christ,  the  law,  which  was  four  hundred  and  thirty 
yean  after,  ean  not  diMinnnl.  (Gal.  iii.  17.)  Now,  that  the 
peD)ile  were  »rider  a  covenant  of  grace  when  the  law  was  deliv- 
ered on  Mount  Sinai,  let  the  preface  of  the  ten  commandments 
determine,  wherein  Gwl's  first  words  are  words  of  grace,  "  I  am 
the  Lord  thy  God,"  etc.,  and  therefore  thou  shalt  have  no  oiher 
gods  but  me,  etc.  I  know  Paneus,  Zanchy,  and  others  affirm 
that  the  law  is  abrogated  as  it  was  in  the  hands  of  Moses,  but 
not  M  it  is  in  the  hand  of  Christ ;  but  their  meaning  is  at  sometime 
in  respect  of  the  manner  of  administration  of  the  taw  under 
Moses,  and  when  they  speak  of  the  moral  law  simply  consid- 
ered, yet  it  never  entered  into  their  hearts,  that  the  law,  as  deliv- 
ered on  Mount  Sinai,  was  delivered  only  aa  a  covenant  of  works. 

THE    MOKAI.ITV    OK    llIK    >,ABB\Tn.  101 

TTtrtit  104.     But  there  is  a  greater  mystery  iniended  by  some 

in  this  phrase,  as  given  by  ChrUt,  for  tlicir  meaning  ia  tbis,  to 

wit.  as  Chriat  by  bis  Spirit  writes  it  in  our  hearts,  nut  any  vrtty 

A  rule  as  wniien  by  Moses.     A  believer's  heart  (sailh  Master 

Sftltmarsh)  is  the  very  law  of  <^omraands,  and  the  two  tables  of 

Hoses,  and  in  tbis  respect  it  becomes  not  (sailh  he)  the  glory  of 

Christ  to  be  beholding  to  any  of  the  light  upon  Moses'  ftu'e.     It 

■eem-s  then,  ibat  the  law  written  is  not  to  be  n  Christian's  rule, 

I    but  only  so  far  as  it  is  written  in  the  heart  —  a  most  accursed  as- 

I    aertion  ;  for  how  and  why  did  Christ  Jesus  himself  resist  temp- 

,    bUioD  to  sin  ?     Was  it  not  by  cleaving  to  the  written  word  ? 

iSIatt.  xliv.  10  :)  and  was  liot  this  done  for  our  imitation  ?  Wby 
id  David  and  Clirist  Jesus  delight  to  do  God's  will  ?  Was  it  not 
Uiis,  because  it  was  written  of  tliera  that  so  ihey  should  do  ?  (Ps. 
xl.  7, 8.)  Did  not  the  Liw  in  their  hearts  make  them  thus  cleave  to 
r  the  wriil4!o  law  without?  Why  did  Paul  persuade  children  to  hoo- 
«r  ibeir  parents  ?  Was  it  not  because  this  wns  the  first  command- 
mctit  with  promise?  (Eph.  vi.  2.)     Had  it  not  been  more  eran- 

Elically  spoken  to  persuade  them  rather  to  look   to  the   law  of 
Dsei  written  on  their  hearts  within,  lo  direct  them  hereunto, 
rather  than  to  be-  beholding  for  any  light  upon  Muses'  face  to 
,    direct  them  herein  ?    How  comes  it  to  pii^  that  Paul   preacheth 
•o  olh«r  thing  but  what  was  in  the  Old  Toslament  of  Moses  and 
Ihe  prophets  who  were  only  ibe  interpreters  of  Mo^es?  (Acts 
1  xxii.  20.)  How  is  it  that  Clirist  himself  borrows  light  from  Mosesi 
[  Psalms,  and  all  tlie  prophets,  lo  clear  up  his  resurrection  and  suf- 
fering. (Luke  sxiv.  '27, 32,)  if  no  light  must  be  borrowed  from  the 
I  Ace  of  Moses?     If  indeed  we  were  perfect  in  this  life  as  we 
[  Aall  be  in  heaven,  there  would  then  be  no  need  of  the  writings 
[  af   the  BpiMtle>i.  prophets,  or   Moses,  of  law  or  gospel  ;  but  we 
I  being  but  imperfectly  enlightened,  it  is  no  less  than  extreme  lo- 
L  pwitude  and  ant  hank  fulness  lo  prefer  our  own   imperfect  and 
I,  impure  light  before  that  perfect,  spotless,  and  heavenly  law  and 
I  eounaels  of  God  without  us/which  when  the  most  perfei-t   be- 
[  Sever  doth  see,  he  may  cry  out  with  Paul,  "  The  law  is  holv, 
I  bdl  I  am  camnl."     What  is  this  but  painted  Popery,  to  muCel 
kthe  spirit  within  lo  be  the  supreme  Judge,  and  su[>erior  lo  the  ■ 
■  Spirit  of  God   in  the  written  word  without?  only  they  shrine  ilj 
he  pope's  private   conclave  and  kitchen,  or   somewliiit 
I'WOTM,  but  these  in  a  company  of  poor,  iraperfeci,  deluded,  and 
f 'prrhape  rarrnpfed  men  :  it  is  true,  the  covenant  of  grace  (strictly 
l^taken)  in  thcgos]>el  needs  not  to  borrow  any  light  from  the  cov- 
unt  of  worits  in  the  law  ;  but  yet,  fur  all  this,  the  grucu  of  God, 
I'^pearing  id  the  gospel,  will  have  ui  to  walk  worthy  of  God 




unto  all  well  plen^ing  acvonllng  lo  the  Iftw,  (Til.  ii.  12,  13,)  and 
bilterlj  that  we  nrc  so  unlike  thu  will  and  image  of  God 
reri^nled  in  the  law.  (Ham.  vii.  23.  24.) 

i(  105.  Tiic  BjKislle  Paul,  as  he  sometimes  condemna 
works  and  sometimes  commendB  tliem,  po  he  Rometimcs  rejecia 
the  law  utid  sometimes  uommends  the  law  ;  aoinetinieii  be  would 
liBve  believers  die  to  tho  biw,  and  sometimes  he  exhortfi  them 
to  live  in  all  holy  obedience  to  it :  the  ajiaslle,  therefore,  must 
■pe»k  of  ihe  law  under  various  considerations,  or  else  must  speak 
daggers  and  flat  contradictions ;  and  therefore  of  net-essiij  we 
are  to  consider  the  law  not  always  under  one  respect,  but  vari- 
ously i  for  consider  tin:  law  as  a  covcliant  of  works,  or  as  the  way 
unto  or  matter  of  our  jus  I  ill  cat  ion,  and  so  works  are  condemned, 
and  ihc  law  is  rejected  and  abrogated,  and  so  we  are  lo  die  to 
the  law  i  but  consider  the  law  as  a  rule  of  life  to  a  person  justified 
already,  and  ao  the  law  is  to  be  received,  and  works  are  lo  be 
commended,  and  wc  arc  lo  live  thereunto. 

Theiii  106,  When  the  gospel  nakedly  ui^lh  believers  lo 
good  works  and  obedience  to  the  law,  it  is  then  considered  only 
U  a  rule  of  life;  hut  when  we  meet  with  ouch  ecriplures  ns  set 
the  law  and  Christ,  the  law  and  grace,  the  law  and  promise,  the 
law  and  faith,  etc,  at  opposition  one  against  another,  then  Ihe  law 
in  such  places  is  ever  considered  as  a  covenant  of  life,  from 
.which  we  are  wholly  freed,  and  unto  which  we  should  be  wholly 
dead,  tjiat  w^  may  be  married  unto  Chrlst^Rom.  vii.  4 ;)  hence 
therefore  their  arguings  are  feeble  and  weak,  who  would  prove  a 
Christian  to  be  wholly  free  from  the  directive  power  of  the  law, 
because  a  Christian  is  said  not  to  be  under  the  law,  but  under 
grace,  (Rom.  vi.  14,)  and  because  the  law  was  given  by  Moses, 
but  grace  and  truth  came  by  >Fesus  Christ,  (John  i.  17.)  and  bu- 
eause  the  inheritance  ts  not  by  the  law,  but  by  promise  and  by  faith, 
(Gal.  iii.  12,  18;)  for  these  and  such  like  scripiui-es  speak  of  the 
uw  as  standing  in  opposition  to  Christ,  and  therefore  speak  of  it 
as  of  a  covenant  of  life,  by  which  men  seek  to  be  justified; 
from  which  (we  grant)  a  l>elievcr  is  wholly  freed,  and  unto 
which  he  is  not  bound,  tiaj.  he  is  bound  to  renounce  it,  and  east 
outtlib  bond  woman;  but  all  this  doih  not  prove  tliat  he  is  free 
from  it  as  his  rule  of  life. 

T/tftii  107.  The  law  and  man's  sinful  heart  are  quite  op- 
posite one  to  another,  (Rom.  vii.  9. 10,  II,  13;)  bul  when  (through 
the^raceof  Chridt)  (he  liearlischan){ed,  soas  there  is  a  new  nature 
or  new  man  in  a  believer,  theu  there  is  a  sweet  agreement  be- 
tween this  new  nature  and  the  law,  for,  saith  Paul,  "  I  delight 
Vihelawof  God  in  my  iauw  man."     It  ia  ifaentfor*  a  humi 


;■     Of    1 



a  believer  is  to  be  kept 
alure,  is  above  all  law ; 
a  legal  covenant,  yet  it 

&l«e  assertion  lo  say  lliat  llie  old  m 

ODder  tbe  law,  but  the  new  man. or 

for  iboiigh  the  new  nature  be  almve 

oerer  cornea  to  be  willingly  under  it  as  a  rule  unill  now  : 

perfect  new  nature  U  infinitely  glad  of  the  guidance  of  a  holy  I 

And  most  perfect  law.  (Ps.  cxix.  UO.)  _  1 

nen't  108.  It  is  very  evident  that  the  children  and  sons  of 
God  tinder  tbe  New  TestDoient  are  not  so  under  the  law  a^  the 
diildren  and  sons  of  God  were  under  the  Old  Testament  for 
the  apoitle  expreasly  lells.  (Gnl.  iii.  23.)  that  before  the  faith 
came,  wc  (L  e.,  the  children  of  the  Old  Testaraeni)  were  shut  up 
■nd  kept  under  the  law,  and  were  under  it  as  under  a  Rchool- 
Basler.  (ver.  ii;)  and  these  of  whom  the  apostle  thus  speaks  are 
M>t  only  wicked  and  carnal  Jews,  but  the  dear  children  of  God 
■nd  heirs  of  eternal  life  in  iliose  times,  as  is  evident  from  Gal. 
IT.  1-3  :  but  (he  apostle,  speaking  of  tbe  sons  of  God  in  gospel 
tines,  since  faith  is  come  and  revealed,  speaks  as  expressly  that 
we  are  now  no  lonfi;er  under  tbe  law  as  under  a  schoolmaster, 
{Gal.  iii.  io.)  and  that  now,  "  when  the  fullness  of  ^me  is  come, 
God  sent  his  Son,  to  redeem  ihem  that  were  under  tbe  law,  that  we 
Biigbl  receive  the  adoption  of  sons,"  (Gal.  iv.  3-5  ;)  which  though 
it  be  true  of  all  men  by  nature,  viz.,  that  they  are  under  the 
law,  yet  an  impartial,  clear  eye  will  easily  discern  that  tbe  apoa- 
tie's  dispute  is  not  of  our  being  under  the  law  by  nature  merely, 
but  of  being  under  the  law  by  peculiar  dii^pensation,  which  was 
the  state  not  only  of  the  churcii,  but  of  the  children 
of  God,  heirs  of  tlie  promise  (and  conseriuently  such  as  were 
believers)  in  ibis  church,  in  those  Old  Tet^Iament  times; 
«e  are  not  therefore  now,  in  these  New  Testament  times,  under 
Ibv  law,  at  iliey  were ;  the  great  diliiculty  therefore  remains  lu 

1  know  bow  wo  are  not  under  tbe  taw,  as  they  were.  Those  who 
ny  wc  are  not  under  the  ceremonial  law.  as  they  were,   do 

'  spMik  truly ;  but  they  do  not  resolve  the  difficulty  in  this 
_ '  p* ;  for  I'crtaiiily  the  apostle  speaks,  not  only  of  the  ceremo- 
nial law,  but  aldo  of  that  law  which  was  given  because  of  trans- 
greasions,  (GaL  iii.  li*,)  and  which  shut  up,  not  only  the  Jews, 
but  all  men,  under  sin,  (ver.  22  ;)  which  being  ihe  power  of  the 
■Ktral  law  chietly,  the  apostle  must  therefore  intend  the  moral 

,  law,  oader  which  the  Old  Testament  believers  were  shut  up,  and 
now  are  not :  the  doubt  therefoi'e  still  remains,  viz.,  how  are 
n«l  now    under   tbe   moral  law  ?     Will  s 

arc  not  now  under  the 


I  af  il,  but  the  Jeni  under  ihe  OUl  1 
I  •vn  lUHkr  tiM  curM  »f  ii ' 

tny  say  that  i 
^  and  condemnalio 
were  thus  under  i 
!  tbe  neauinf ;  f«r 




allhough  the  carnal  Jews  were  tbiis  under  it,  yet  the  ftiithrul 
(whiim  the  apostle  calls  tlie  heir  atiJ  Lord  of  all,  GaL  iv.  1) 
were  not  thus  under  it,  for  believers  were  as  oiueli  blessed  then 
with  faithful  Abraham  as  believerfi  now.  (Cup.  iii.9.)  How  then 
are  we  not  under  il,  aa  they  were  ?  Is  it  in  this,  Ihat  they  were 
under  it  ua  a  rule  of.  lifejojvalk  ^7-  an*l  so  ai'e  not  we  ?  Thus 
indeed  some  strain  the  place,  but  this  can  not  be  it ;  for  the  apos- 
tle in  this  very  epistle  presseth  them  to  "  love  one  another,"  upon 
this  ground,  because  "nil  the  law  is  fulfilled  in  love,"  (cap.  v. 
13,  14  ;1  and  this  walking  in  love  according  to  the  law  ia  walk- 
ing in  [fie  spirit,  (ver.  16,)  and  (hey  that  thus  walk  in  Ihe  spirit, 
according  to  the  law,  are  not  (snith  the  apostle)  under  ibe  law, 
which  can  not,  without  flat  contradiction,  be  meant  of  not  being 
under  the  rule  or  directive  power  of  it ;  and  it  would  be  a  tnis- 
erable  weak  motive  to  press  them  to  love,  because  all  the  law  ia 
fulfilled  in  love,  if  the  law  was  not  to  be  regarded  as  any  rule  of 
life  or  of  love ;  for  they  might  upon  such  a  ground  easily  and  Justly 
obect,  and  say.  What  have  we  to  do  with  the  law  ?  If  we  therefore, 
OS  well  as  they,  are  thus  under  the  law  as  a.  rule  of  life,  how  are 
we  not  under  it  as  they  were  ?  Is  it  because  ihey  were  under  it  as 
a  preparative  means  for  Christ,  and  not  we  ?  They  were  under 
the  humbling  and  terrifying  preparing  work  of  it,  but  not  we, 
I  There  are  some,  indeed,  who  think  ihm  this  use  of  the  law  under 
'the  gospel  is  but  a  back  door,  or  an  Indian  palh,  or  a  crooked 
way  about,  to  lead  to  Jeeus  Christ;  but  certainly  these  men 
^know  not  what  they  snjJtot  the  text  expressly  tells  us  that  the 
Scripture  hasconcluded.not  only  Ihe  Jews,  but  "oil  under  sin,  that 
so  the  promise  by  faith  might  be  given  to  ibcm  that  believe." 
{Gal.  iii.  22.)  So  that  the  law  is  subservieut  to  faith,  and  to  the 
promise,  that  so  hereby  not  only  the  Jews,  but  all  that  God  saves, 
might  hereby  feel  their  need,  and  lly  by  faith  to  the  promise 
made  in  Jesus  Christ ;  and  verily,  if  Christ  be  the  end  of  (he 
taw  to  every  one  that  believes,  (Kom.  x.  4,)  then  the  law  is  Ihe 
means,  (not  of  itself  so  much  as  by  the  rich  grace  of  God.)  not 
only  to  the  Jews,  but  to  all  others  to  the  end  of  the  world,  to 
lead  them  to  this  end,  Christ  Jesus.  If  therefore  the  faithful 
under  the  New  Testament  are  thus  under  the  preparing  work  of 
the  law,  aa  well  as  those  under  the  Old,  how  were  they  therefore 
RO  under  the  law,  as  we  are  not,  and  we  not  under  it  as  they 
were  ?  I  confess  the  place  is  more  full  of  difRculliea  than  is 
usually  Dbser\-ed  by  writers  upon  it ;  only  for  the  clearing  up  of 
this  doubt,  omitting  many  things,  I  answer  briefly,  that  the  chil- 
dren of  the  Old  Testament  were  under  the  law,  and  the  peda- 
gogy of  it,  two  ways,  after  which  the  children  of  the  New  Testa- 
ntent  are  not  under  it  now,  but  are  rodeemed  from  it. 

THE    MORALITY    or   TDK    SABBATH.  105 

1.  At  t)ie  mora]  Uw  waa  accompanied  with  a  namlierot'barden- 
•orae  Fcrt-monies,  ibui!  we  are  not  under  il,  tlins  they  were  under 
U ;  for  we  know  this  law  was  put  inio  the  ttrk,  and  there  they 
were  lolook  npon  it  in  thai  type;  if  any  inan  then  committed  any 
BID  H^nst  il,  whether  through  infirmity,  ignorance,  or  presump- 
tion, they  were  to  have  recourse  to  the  ancrificea  and  high  priests 
yearlyand  to  (heir  blood  and  oblations.  They  were  to  prny,  (which 
was  a  moral  duty.)  btil  it  must  be  with  incense,  and  in  suvh  a 
^tace ;  they  were  lo  be  thankful,  (another  moral  duly,)  but  it  must 
be  testified  by  the  offering  up  of  many  sacrifices  upon  the  altar, 
etc  ;  they  were  to  confess  tlieir  sins,  (a  moral,  duty  also,)  but  it 
must  be  over  the  head  of  the  scapegoat,  ele.  Thus  they  were  un- 
der the  Iftw,  bat  we  are  not ;  and  fu  it  is  usual  for  the  apostle 
tbm  to  speak  of  the  law  in  other  places  of  the  Scripture,  bo 
wirely  he  speaks  of  il  here  ;  for  hence  it  is  that,  in  the  beginning 
of  this  dispute,  (cap.  iii.  19,)  be  speaks  6f  the  moral  law  which 
wu  given  becaose  of  transgressions ;  and  yet,  in  the  close  of  it, 
{Gal>  iv.  3,)  he  seems  lo  speak  only  of  [he  ceremonial  law,  which 
he  calls  the  elements  of  the  world,  under  which  the  children 
vere  then  in  bondage,  as  under  tutors  and  governors ;  which 
implies  thus  much,  that  the  children  of  the  Old  Testament  wei-e 
indeed  under  the  moral  law,  but  yet  witlml  as  thus  accompanied 
with  ceremonial  rudiments  and  elements  fit  to  teach  children  in 
their  minority ;  but  now  in  this  elder  age  of  the  church,  although 
ire  are  under  the  moral  law  in  other  respects,  yet  we  are  not 
under  it  as  thus  aceoropanied. 

3.  In  renpect  of  the  mnnner  and  measure  of  dbpcnsation  of 
the  moral  law,  which  although  it  had  the  revelation  of  the  gospel 
eonjoin^d  with  it.  (for  Moses  writ  of  Christ,  John  v.  46,  and 
Abraham  had  the  gospel  preached  to  him,  Gial.  it.  8,  and  the  un- 
believing Jews  hail  the  gospel  preached,  Heb.  iv.  2,)  yet  the  law 
was  revealed  and  pressed  more  clearly  and  strongly,  with  more 
rigor  and  terror,  and  the  gospel  was  revealed  more  obscurely 
and  darkly  in  res[>ect  of  the  manner'of  external  diapensniion  of 
ihom  in  those  times ;  there  were  three  things  in  that  manner  of  dis- 
pvnualion,  from  which  (at  least  AC/>arfei>rtre(^^ft<)  we  are  now 

1.  Then  there  was  much  law  urged,  esternally,  clearly,  and 
little  gospel  so  clearly  revealed ;  indeed  gospel  and  Christ  Jesus 
«ru  the  end  of  the  moral  law,  and  the  substance  of  all  the  shad- 
ows of  the  ceremooiul  law ;  but  the  external  face  of  these  things 
WM  MWTe  any  tiling  else  but  doing  and  law,  by  reason  of  which 
lber«  ia  a  vail  spread  over  the  hearts  of  the  Jews  in  reading  the 
Old  Tetlwnent  tinlo  this  day,  as  is  evident,  (2  Cor.  lit.  13 :)  lO 



106  rilK   JIOBALlTt    Of  TIIK   .SABBATH. 

that  till)  inside  or  end  of  ihe  moral  luw  being  gospel,  snd  ilie 
.autside  and  means  H;>[>ointe<l  lo  ihis  end  lieing  law,  lient^e  the 
gospel  wa-t  llicn  less  clearly,  anil  tlic  law  was  more  i^learly,  re- 
vealed in  liioxe  times  ;  lo  »ay  (Imt  Jesos  Cliriet  and  hia  beneliis, 
or  eternal  life,  were  then  dispensed  niidcr  a  covenant  of  works, 
or  tub  eoHditioae  perfeeta  obrdientiee.  (us  some  eminent  wortliies 
affirm,)  is  such  an  error  wliidi  wise  and  able  men  ini;>ht  eosilj' 
fall  into  by  tieeing  how  mueli  law  was  revealed  and  urged  in  ibose 
times  1  fur  ihougli  tlie  law,  simply  considered  in  itself,  contained 
the  matter  of  the  covenant  of  works,  yet  considered  relatively  in 
respect  of  the  people  of  God,  and  as  they  were  under  Abiiihem'a 
covenant  of  grace,  so  it  was  given  to  them  as  a  rule  of  perfect 
rigtileousoess,  by  both  which  they  might  the  better  see  their  own 
wealcuess  and  unrighteousness,  and  fly  to  Christ ;  and  therefore 
the  apostle  (Gal.  iii.  17)  calls  the  promise  which  was  made  to 
Ahraham  the  covenant,  and  gives  not  this  title  lo  the  law,  but 
calls  it  the  law  which  (he  saith)  could  not  disannul  the  covenant, 
conRrmed  in  Christ ;  and  although  it  be  propounded  to  ihem  in 
way  of  covenant,  (Ex.  xix.  5,)  yet  ihis  is  to  be  understood  (as 
some  lliink)  of  evangelical  keeping  covenant,  not  of  legal ;  or 
if  of  legal,  yet  then  it  is  not  propounded  simply,  as  a  covenant  of 
works,  to  convey  Christ  lo  ihem,  but  ex  hypothtti,  or  upon  sup- 
position, that  if  they  did  think  to  be  God's  people,  and  have  him 
10  be  their  God,  by  doing,  (as  Junius  observes  the  carnal  Jews  did 
think  and  liope  so  to  have  him,  and  as  that  young  man  thought. 
Matt.  xix.  17,  as  Chamier  observes,)  that  then  they  must  keep 
all  these  commandments  perfectly,  and  to  be  accursed  if  they 
£d  not  continue  therein.  1  dars  iiot  tlicrcfore  sny  tl>at  Christ 
and  eternal  lite  were  dispensed  in  a  covenant  of  works,  under 
which  covenant  the  Jews  were  shut  in  Old  Testament  times ; 
but  rather  this,  tliatlhe  law  was  more  strongly  pressed  as  a  yoke 
upon  llKir  shoulders,  and  that  this  law  which  contains  the  cov- 
enant of  works  was  more  plentifully  revealed  and  insisted  on, 
and  tl)e  gospel  more  sparitigly  and  daiitly ;  but  now  in  gospel 
times  the  daystar  is  risen,  (though  in  few  men's  hearts,)  yet  in 
the  doctrine  and  clear  revelation  of  it  llierein,  and  therefore  the 
gospel  is  called  the  "  mystery  hidden  from  ages  and  generations 
post,  but  DOW  is  made  manifest  to  his  saints,"  (Col.  i.  2G,)  wiiich 
ona  not  be  meant  as  if  they  had  no  knowledge  of  it,  for  Abra- 
ham saw  Christ's  day,  and  there  is  a  cloud  of  w.itneases  in  the 
Old  Testament  who  died  in  faith,  (Ilcb.  xi.,)  but  not  such  clear 
knowledge  of  it  as  now  :  they  were  therefore  then  under  the 
i,  (because  so  much  working  and  doing  was  urged 
and  chiedy  revealed,)  but  indeed  were  sous  and  heirs ;  but  we 

THE    SlOR*LITV    OF    THE    SAUBiTU.  107 

iioiv  we  iioi  so  under  it.  but  are  as  sons  having  the  Lord  JeauB 

i  our  Father's  face  in  liim  ckarlj  reveakd,  and  laitb  in  him 

chiefly  and  most  abundantly  urged  in  hia  blessed  gospel;  and 

'  13  the  apostle  lelte  ua  in  this  text,  (Gal.  iv.  1,  with  iv.  5,)  that 
the  huirs  of  the  promise  under  the  Old  Testament  were  as  ser- 
vants, but  by  Christ's  coming  we  are  now  us  sons ;  lootc  also,  as 
ihcy  are  said  to  be  under  the  law,  not  as  if  they  had  no  gospel 

ivcaled.  or  no  use  of  the  gospel,  but  only  because  the  gospel  was 
tnore  darkly  revealed,  and  the  law  more  plentifully  urged,  so  we 
kre  said  not  to  be  under  the  law,  not  as  if  there  was  no  Inw,  or  no 
Bse  o(  the  law  belonging  to  us,  but  because  now  the  gospel  is  more 
Hearly  revealed,  and  the  law  ttot  eslemalty  so  proposed  and  im- 
posed as  it  was  upon  them. 

2.  The  law  was  a  schoolmaster,  tuior,  and  goi^ernor,  to  lead 
lliem  unto  Christ  to  come ;  for  so  the  apostle  tells  us  in  this  place, 
(GaL  iii.  23.)  that  "before  fmlh  came,  we  were  shut  up  under 
the  Inw,  onto  the  faith  which  should  afterward  be  revealed." 
Thus  the  ceremonial  law  pointed  to  Christ  to  come,  the  moral 
Uw  discovered  man's  sin  and  misery,  and  need  of  Christ  who 
was  lo  come  ;  nay,  all  the  promises  were  made  with  reference  to 
Jesus  Christ  lo  come  ;  hut  now  "  the  fullness  of  time  being  come," 
lluu  the  Son  of  God  is  come,  now  "  we  are  no  longer  under  the 
kw"  after  this  manner;  neither  ceremonial  nor  moral  law  is  of 
any  use  lo  us  lo  lead  us  unto  Christ  to  come,  for  Christ  is  already 
come ;  and  hettre  it  is,  that  believers  now  are  said  to  be  rather 
under  the  gospel  than  under  the  law,  and  believers  under  the  Old 
Testament  to  be  nlher  under  the  law  than  under  the  gospel ; 
bMnu^e,  although  these  had  the  efficacy  of  Christ's  redemption, 
yet  ihey  were  not  actually  redeemed,  because  the  Redeemer  was 
■ot  yei  corae  into  the  flesh,  and  in  this  respect  they  were  under 
the  rij^r  of  the  law,  and  hence  it  was  fit  that  they  should  be 
handled  as  servants,  and  the  law  and  curse  thereof  principally 
rvvcKled ;  but  now  Christ  being  come,  nnd  having  actually  re- 

Idi-emcd  us.  having  been  (not  only  virtually,  but  actually)  made 
righteousness  and  a  ctiree  for  us,  now  ifacrefore  is  the  time  ibat 
v«  sbould  see  Christ  Jesus  with  open  face,  and  hear  principally 
ti>Rc«ming  iHilh  and  the  Father's  love  in  him  (  now  Christ  is 
ivvcalcd  chielly  (being  come)  the  end  of  the  law,  then  the  law 
waa  revealed  chietly  (Christ  being  not  yet  come)  a 
Ibis  end :  look  therefore,  as  the  promise  before  Christ,  of  which 
rbe  ai>OStIe  speaks.  (Gal.  iii.  17-22.)  was  fullilled  in  Christ  being 
come,  (as divines  spvak,)  rather  than  abolished,  and  yet  abolished 
aa  it  WM  a  promise  of  grace  to  come,  so  the  moral  Inw  is  rather 
ftiMlM  tluin  abolished  in  Christ  being  come;  and  yet  lu  it 

l>eing  ^ 

ished  M 

alher  H 

Udid  V 





lead  unU)  Christ  to  come,  it  is  abolished  to  ua  now  under  the 

3.  The  law  being  principally  revealed,  and  yet  so  revealed  ta 
to  lead  unto  Christ  Jesus  to  come,  lieiice  ariseUi  a  third  tiling  of 
the  law,  from  which  we  are  now  delivered,  viz.,  they  were  ibere- 
fcre  under  more  terror  and  fear  of  the  law  than  we  are  (on 
God's  part  revealing  the  gospel  more  clearly)  in  ihese  times ; 
and  therefore  Baith  the  aposlle,  (Gal.  iv.  4-6,)  "iliatwhen  the 
fullness  of  time  came,  Gn^d  sent  his  Son  to  redeem  us  from  under 
the  law,  (hat  we  might  receive  tlie  adoption  of  sons,  and  thereby 
the  spirit  of  song,  crying,  Abba,  Falher."  Could  not  they  who 
were  sons  under  the  law  call  God  Falher  ?  Tes,  verily,  doubtless 
thou  art  our  Father,  say  they,  (Is.  Ixiii.  17;)  but  tboy  having 
less  light,  they  had  more  fear  and  lees  of  the  spirit  of  adoption,  t 
fay  still,  (ex  parte  Dei  revelantU.)  than  we  l^ve  in  these  days. 
We  ore  not  therefore  so  under  the  law,  i.  e.,  the  fear  and  terror 
of  the  law,  as  they  were.  The  sum  of  all  this  is.  that  although 
we  are  not  so  under  the  law,  1,  so  accompanied,  and,  2,  so  dis- 
pensed, as  they  were  under  tlie  Old  Testament,  yet  this  hindeia 
not  but  that  we  are  under  the  directive  power  of  the  law  aa 
well  as  they. 

Tlietit  109.  The  aposlle  speaks  of  a  law  written  and  engraven 
on  stones,  and  therefore  of  the  moral  law,  which  is  now  abolished 
by  Christ  in  the  gospel.  (2  Cor.  iii.  6,  7,  11,  13.)  Is  the  moral 
law  therefore  abolished  as  a  rule  of  life  now  ?  No,  verily ;  but 
Ibe  meaning  of  this  place  is  as  the  former,  (Gal.  iii.  25,)  for  the 
ftpostlc,  speaking  of  tlte  moral  law  by  a  synecdoche,  comprehends 
the  ceremonial  law  also,  both  which  the  false  teachers  in  those 
titnea  urged  as  necessary  to  salvation  and  justiGcation  at  least 
together  with  Christ,  against  whom  the  apostle  here  disputes ; 
the  moral  law  therefore  is  abolished,  tirst,  as  thus  accompanied 
with  a  yoke  of  ceremonies  j  secondly,  as  it  was  formerly  dispensed, 
the  glorious  and  greater  light  of  the  gospel  now  obscuring  the 
lesser  light  under  the  law,  and  therefore  the  i^HMtle  (ver.  10) 
doth  not  say,  that  there  was  no  glory  shining  in  Uie  law,  but  it 
had  no  comparative  glory  in  this  respect,  by  reason  of  the  glory 
which  exccUeth  ;  and  lastly,  the  apostle  may  speak  of  the  moral 
law,  considered  aa  a  covenant  of  life  which  the  false  teachers 
urged,  in  which  respect  he  calls  it  the  ministry  of  death,  and  the 
letter  which  killelh,  and  the  ministers  (who  were  called  Naxarei 
Mid  Minei,  09  Bollinger  thinks)  the  ministers  of  the  letter,  which 
although  it  was  virtually  abolished  to  the  believing  Jews  before 
gospel  times,  (the  virtue  of  Christ's  death  extending  to  all  times,) 
jet  it  was  not  then  abolished  actually  until  Christ  came  in  the 


i  flesh,  aod  actually  undertook  to  fulftll  thU  covenant  for  ns  to  the 
aimoit  farthing  of  doing  and  suffering  which  is  exacted ;  and  now 
it  is  aboliaht^d  both  vinunlly  and  iiciually,  that  now  we  may  with 
open  face  behold  the  glory  of  the  Lord  as  the  end  of  the  law  for 
nghieousoesd  to  every  one  that  doth  believe. 

Tktii*  110.      The  gospel   under   which   believers  now  an 
,    Tcquires  DO  doing,  (say  some,)  for  doing  i»  proper  to  the  law; 
the  biw  promUelh  life,  and  requires  conditions ;  but  the  gospel 
'    (»ay  they)  promiseih  lo  work  the  condition,  but  requires  none, 
,    and  therefore  a  believer  is  now  wholly  free  from  all  law.     But 
,    the  gospel  and  law  are  taken  two  waya:  1.  Largely,  the  law  for 
the  whole  doctrine  contained  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  the  gos- 
pel for  the  whole  doctrine  of  Christ  and  the  apostles  in  the  New 
Testament;    3.  Strictly,  the  law  pro  lege  operian,  (as  Chamier 
distinguisbetk,)  and  the  gospel  pro  Ugtjidei,  i.  c.,  for  the  law  of 
fiuth.     The  law  of  works,  strictly  taken,  is  ibat  law  which  rereaC 
'    lli«  favor  of  God  and  eternal  life  upon  condition  of  doing  or  of 
perfect  obedience ;  the  law  of  faith,  strictly  taken,  is  that  doctrin* 
which   reveals  remission  of  sins,   reconciliation  with  God   by 
Christ's  nghteousness  only  apprehended  by  faith.    Now,  the  gos- 
pel in  thi«  latter  Mnse  excludes  all  works,  and  requires  no  doing 
:    in  point  of  Justification  and  remission  of  ains  before  God,  but  only 
believing ;  but  take  the  gospel  largely  for  the  whole  doctrine  of 
1    {rod's  lovv  and  free  grace,  and  so  the  gospel  requires  doing  j  for 
a«  il  is  an  act  of  God's  free  grace  to  justify  a  man  without  callmg 
tot  any  works  thereunto,  so  it  is  an  act  of  the  same  free  grace 
lo  require  works  of  a  peraon  justified,  and  that  such  poor  sinners 
•haiiU  Bland  bctore  the  Son  of  God  on  his  throne,  to  minister 
vnta  biro,  and  serve  him  in  righteousness  and  liulinegs  all  the 
day*  of  our  lives,  (Tit.  ii.  14;)  and  for  any  to  think  that  the 
gMpel  requirei*  no  conditions  is  a  sudden  dream  against  hun- 
I    dr«idA  of  scriptures,  which  contain  conditional,  yet  evangelical 
I  promises,  and  against  the  judgment  of  the  most  judicious  of  our 
I  divines,  who,  in  dispute  against  Popish  writers,  can  not  but  ac- 
[  IiiKtwIttdgt)  ihem  only  thus,  viz.,  conditions  and  prpmises  annexed 
I  lo  obedience  arc  one  thing,  (saiih  learned  Pemblc,)  and  conditions 
I  innexed  to  perfect  obedience  are  another ;  the  first  are  in  iha 
I  BMiirl,  the  other  not.     Works  are  necessary  to  salvation,  (sait^ 
[   Chnmiur,)  Hterisitatt  prateatia,  not  e^fficreiilia ;   and  hence  hgj 
I  Biakeis  two  sorts  of  conditions,  some  auttetdenU*,  wliich  work  or 
k  Rterit  salvation,  and  these  are  abandoned  in  the  gospel;  others 
I  (he  uuth)  are  comt^urnla.  which  follow  the  stote  of  a  man  jusli- 
I  fied,  atid  thnse  are  required  of  one  already  justified  in  the  gospel. 
^TlMiRi  are  indeed  no  con<litions  required  of  us  in  the  gospel,  but 
VOL.  lit.  10 




r  halh  n 

those  only  which  the  Lord  himself  bIiqII  o 
and  which  by  requiring  of  us  he  dolh  work :  will  it  therefore  fol- 
low, that  no  condiiion  is  required  in  u»,  but  because  every  con- 
dition is  promised  ?  No,  verily,  for  requiring  the  condition  is  tlie 
means  to  work  it,  (as  might  be  plentifully  demonstrated,)  and 
menos  and  ends  should  not  be  separated.  Faith  itself  is  no  an-  "^ 
tecedent  condition  to  o«r  justification  or  Eulvation,  take  antecedent,' 
in  the  usual  sense  of  some  divines,  for  affecting  or  meriting  con- 
dition, whicfi  Juniua  calls  etgerUiaiii  conditio :  but  take  ante- 
cedent for  a  means  or  instrument  of  justification,  and  receiving 
Christ's  righteousness,  in  this  sense  it  is  the  only  antecedent  con- 
dition which  the  gospel  requires  therein,  because  it  dolh  only 
atitecedere,  or  go  before  our  justification,  (at  least  in  oi-der  of 
nature,)  not  lo  merit  it,  but  to  receive  it,  not  to  make  it,  but  to 
make  it  our  own,  not  as  the  matter  of  our  righteousness,  or  any 
part  of  it,  but  as  the  only  means  of  apprehending  Christ's  right- 
eousness, which  is  the  only  cause  why  God  the  Father  juslifieth  -j^. 
and  therefore,  as  Christ's  righteousness  must  go  before,  as  the. 
matter  and  moving  cause  of  our  justiflcatiuu.  or  that  for  which 
we  are  justified,  so  faith  must  go  before  this  righteousness  as  an 
instrument  or  applying  cause  of  it,  by  which  we  are  justified,  that 
is,  by  means  of  which  we  apply  that  rigbieousness  which  makes 
us  just  It  is  true  God  justifies  the  ungodly ;  but  how  ?  not  im- 
mediately without  faith,  but  mediately  by  faith,  as  is  most  evident 
from  that  abused  text,  Rom.  iv.  5.  When  works  and  failh  arc 
ogiposed  by  the  aposlle  in  point  of  justification,  affirming  that  we 
are  justified  by  faith,  not  by  works,  he  doth  hereby  plainly  atfirm, 
and  give  that  to  faith  which  he  denies  to  works ;  look  therefore, 
as  he  denies  works  to  b^  anlecedent  conditions  of  our  justi  Heal  ion, 
be  atfirms  the  contrary  of  faith,  which  goes  before  our  justifica- 
tion, as  hath  been  ex|tlained;  and  therefore,  as  do  and  live  halli 
been  accounted  good  law,  or  the  covenant  of  works,  so  believe 
and  live  halh  been  in  former  times  accounted  good  gospel,  or  the 
of  grace,  until  now  of  late  this  wild  age  hath  found  out 
els  tliat  Paul  and  the  apostles  did  never  dream  of,^*^ 

work,  and  have 

n  may  be  set  to  do  the  si 
same  rule  given  them  to  act'by ;  but  the 
r  work,  and  the  stripes  and  punishmenia 
for  neglect  of  iheir  work,  may  be  various  and  divers ;  a  son 
may  be  bound  to  it,  because  he  is  a  son  and  beloved ;  a  servant 
may  he  bound  to  do  the  same  work,  because  he  is  hired  and 
shall ,  have  wages  ;  if  a  son  neglect  his  .work,  his  punishment  ia 
only  the  chastisement  of  a,  father  for  his  good ;  if  a  servant  be 
faulty,  he  is  turned  quite  out  of  doors.     So,  although  believers 


in  Ciiri-i,  and  lliose  tliat  are  out  of  Clirial,  have  divers  and 
various  motives  lo  tlie  obedience  ol'  the  law  of  God,  yet  ihese 
do  not  vary  llic  rule ;  the  liiw  of  God  is  iLe  rule  to  ihem  both, 
klihaiigli  ibcy  lliul  be  out  of  Christ  liave  nothing  but  fear  and 
faopv  of  n-ajrea  lo  urge  them,  and  those  that  are  in  Christ  should 
have  noihiu^  hut  the  love  of  a  Father,  and  the  heartblood 
nercy  of  a  lender  tSaviour  and  Redeemer  to  compel  them  :  the 
one  may  be  bound  to  do,  that  so  ihey  may  live,  the  other  may 
be  bound  to  do,  because  they  do  live ;  the  one  may  be  bound  lo 
do>  or  eUe  they  shall  be  jui!tly  plagued  ;  ibc  other  may  be  bound 
to  do  the  same,  or  else  they  shall  be  mercifully  corrected.  It  is 
therefore  a  mere  feeblcne^  to  think  (as  some  do)  tliat  the  law 

r  rule  is  changed  beeause  the  moiites  lo  the  obedience  of  it, 

nd  punishment  for  the  breach  of  it,  are  now  (unto  a  believer) 
changed  and  altered  ;  for  the  communduient  urged  from  Christ's 
love  may  bind  strongly,  yco,  most  sirougly,  to  do  the  some  thing 
which  the  name  commandment,  propounded  and  received  in  way 
of  hire,  may  bind  aAeo  unto. 

7%Mu  112.  Some  think  that  there  is  no  sin  but  unbelief, 
(which  is  a  sin  against  the  gospel  oidy,}  and  therefore,  there 
being  no  sin  against  any  law,  (Christ  having  by  his  death  abolished 
■11  them,)  the  hiw  cannot  be  a  rule  to  them.  An  adulterous  and ' 
Ml  eril  generation  made  drunk  with  a  cup  of  tlte  wine  of  thi? 
wrath  of  God.  and  slrong  delusion,  do  thus  argue.  Are  drunk- 
eoness,  wboroiluiii,  lying,  cheating,  witchcrati,  oppression,  thcfi, 
buggery,  no  sins,  and  consequently  not  to  be  repented  of,  nor 
wUchcd  aguiiisl.  but  only  unbelief?  Is  there  no  day  of  judg- 
ment, wherein  the  Lord  will  judge  men,  not  only  for  unbeliel',  but 
the  secrets  of  all  hearts,  and  whatever  haib  been  done  in  the 
bMy,  whether  good  or  evil,  according  to  Paul's  gospel?  (Rom. 
it.  16.  2  Cor.  V.  10.)  Uuw  comes  the  wrath  of  God  to  be  re- 
vealed from  lieaven.  not  only  against  unbelief,  bat  against  all 
anrigbwoiuness  and  nngodhness  of  man  ?  ( Rom.  L  18.)  If  there 
was  DO  sin  but  unbelief,  how  can  all  flesh,  Jews  and  Gentiks, 
U»xime  guilty  before  God,  that  so  they  may  believe  in  the  gos- 
nel,  (»»  it  IS  Kum.  iii.  21-24.)  if  they  are  all  guiltless  until  unbe- 
lief cumea  in  ?  There  is  no  sin  inde«d  which  chall  condemn  a 
Bwn  in  ca*e  he  shall  believe ;  bnt  will  it  follow  from  hence  that 
there  is  no  sin  in  a  man  hut  only  unbelief?     A  sick  man  shall 

>t  die  in  case  he  receive  the  physic  which  will  recover  him ; 

R  doth  it  follow  from  hence  that  there  is  no  sickness  in  him,  or 
os»  which  is  able  to  kill  liira,  but  only  his  willful  re- 
jFlfa*  physic?     Surely  his  refusing  of  the  physic  is  not  the 
(  Jus  siektuas  which  was  before,  not  the  natural,  (for  that 


his  sickness  \i.)  but  only  the  moral  cause  of  hU  death.  Sin  is 
before  unbelief  comes;  a  sick  sinner  before  a  heating  Saviour 
can  be  rej<!cleU ;  sin  kilb  the  soul,  as  it  were,  naturally,  unbelief 
morally ;  no  sin  shall  kill  or  condemn  ua  if  ve  believe ;  but  dolli 
it  follow  from  beoce  that  there  is  no  stn  before  or  afler  faith, 
because  there  is  no  condemning  sin  unless  we  fall  by  unbelief? 
No  such  matter;  and  yet  such  is  ibo  madness  of  some  projjbets 
in  these  times,  who,  to  lUiandon  not  only  the  directive  use  of  tbs 
Ittw,  but  also  all  preparing  and  humbliug  work  of  the  law,  am) 
to  make  men's  sinning  the  first  foundation  and  ground  of  their 
believing,  do  therefore  either  abolish  alt  the  being  of  any  sin 
beside  unbelief,  or  the  condemned  estate  of  a  man  for  tiin,  yea, 
for  any  sin,  until  he  refuse  Christ  by  unbelief;  for  publishing 
which  pernicious  doctrines  it  had  been  well  for  them  if  they  had 
never  been  born. 

7'Aem'g  113.  One  would  wonder  how  any  Christian  should 
fall  into  this  pit  of  perdition,  lo  deny  the  directive  use  of  ibe 
law  to  one  in  Christ,  if  either  they  read  Ps.  cczix.  with  any 
favor,  or  the  epiatles  of  John  and  James  with  any  faith ;  in  which 
the  law  is  highly  commended,  and  obedience  thereto  urged  as 
the  happiness  and  chief  evidence  of  the  happiness  of  nian ;  but 
that  certainly  the  root  of  ihia  accursed  doctrine  is  either  a  loose 
heart  which  is  grown  blind  and  bold,  and  secretly  glad  of  a  lib- 
erty, not  so  much  from  the  law  of  sin  as  from  the  law  of  God, 
or  if  the  heart  be  sincere  in  the  main,  yet  it  slights  the  Holy 
Scriptures  at  present,  and  makes  little  conscience  of  judging  in  the 
matters  of  God  according  unto  them;  for  if  it  did  it  could  hardly 
fall  into  this  dirty  ditch,  out  of  which  the  good  Lord  deliver,  and 
out  of  which  I  am  persuaded  he  will  deliver  in  time  all  those 
that  are  bis  own  :  ibr  I  much  question  the  salvation  of  that  man 
who  lives  and  dies  with  this  opinion ;  and  as  every  error  is 
fi  uitful,  so  this  is  in  special ;  for  from  this  darkening  the  direc- 
tive use  of  the  moral  law  arise  (amidst  many  others)  these  ensu- 
ing evils,  which  are  almost,  if  not  altogether,  deadly  to  the  soula 
of  men ;  they  are  principally  these  three. 

I  7K«m  114.  The  first  is  a  shameful  neglect  (in  some  affect- 
ing foolishly  the  name  of  New  Testament  ministers)  of  a  wise 
and  powerful  preaching  of  the  law,  lo  make  way,  by  the  humbling 
work  of  it,  for  the  glorious  gospel,  and  the  affectionate  enter- 
tainment thereof;  for  through  the  righteous  judgment  of  God, 
when  men  once  begin  lo  abandon  this  use  of  the  law  as  a  rule, 
they  abolish  mucli  more  readily  this  use  of  the  law  lo  prepare! 
men  thereby  tor  the  receiving  of  ChrisL  I  know  there  are  some' 
who  acknowledge  this  use  of  the  law  to  be  our  rule,  but  not  to 

■mE  MOHALiTr  OF  THE  sabhatii.  113 

;  bat  huw  loog  they  may  be  ortliorlox  ill  the  one,  who 
[  mn  heleroUuK  in  the  oilier,  the  Lord  only  knows,  for  I  find 
[  that  the  I'liief  nrgumeota  agninst  the  one  do  strike  atrongly 
L  against  the  olher  aliw.  It  is  an  easy  th'iug  lo  cost  blocks  before) 
I  ibe  blind,  and  to  out  mists  before  the  fare  of  the  cle&reat  truth, 
I  anil  to  make  many  specious  shows  of  New  Testament  ministry, 
I  trw  gracv  and  eovenant,  against  this  supposed  legal  way  and  pre- 

Cngworki  but  assuredly  they  that  have  found  and  felt  the 
:  and  comfort  of  this  humbling  way  (for  which  1  doubt  not 
I  bnt  that  thousands  and  thousands  are  blessing  God  in  heaven 
I  -that  ever  ihi'y  heard  of  it)  do  <.-ertainly  and  assuredly  know  that 
e  men  (at  least,  doclrines  in  this  point)  are  not  of  God  —  the 
word  in  iliese  men's  mouihs  being  flat  uonlrary  to  [he  mereiful 
I  and  the  forever  lo  Iw    adored  work  -of  God    in  their   hearts. 


f  evn)  when  lie  o 

i,(Johiixvi.  a.  10.)  which  we  know  is  chiefly  by  the  law.  (Rom. 
I 'Mi.  20;)  and  shall  the  ministers  (not  of  the  letter,  but  of  the  spirit) 
I  mfusc  lo  begin  here,  especially  in  these  times  of  wantonness, 
I  otmtenlion,  confusion,  famine,  sword,  and  blood,  wherein  every 
I  thing  almost  rries  aloud  for  sackcloth,  mid  therefore  not  for 
I  litTany  and  silken  sermons?  As  if  this  corrupt  and  putrefying; 
I  age  Mood  only  in  need  of  sugar  to  preserve  and  keep  them  swei.'i 
w  from  wnnjling.  A^  if  sublime  notions  about  Christ  and  frei> 
L  grarr,  covenant  of  grace,  love  of  the  Father,  the  kingdom  within. 
f  and  Christian  i-xcellcnces  and  privileges,  were  the  only  things  • 
I  this  age  stood  iu  need  of,  and  not  in  any  need  of  searcbings  with 
BBfldlcs.  terrors,  shakings,  sense  of  sin,  or  forewammgs  of  wrath 
to  como. )  As  if  this  old  world  did  need  no  Noah  to  foretell  them 
I  of  flooiU  of  fire  and  wraih  to  come.  Or,  as  if  the  men  of  Sodom 
1  prinii's  of  Gomorrah  should  do  well  to  moek  at  Lot  for 
IllMlding  liiin  to  liusten  out  of  tlie  uity,  because  God  would  destroy 
rb.  Ah  If  ihe  spirit  of  Paul  in  these  times  should  not  know  the 
1  terror  of  tlie  Lord,  and  therefore  persuade  men,  (2  Cor.  v.  10, 
II,)  but  only  the  love  and  free  grace  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and 
I  tbcrKfure  lo  exhort  men,  nay,  rather,  therefore,  to  relate  to  men 
I  Moru-'S  and  notions  alwul  free  grace,  general  redemption,  the  my«- 
|>tery  of  the  Father's  love,  and  the  Christ  in  yon  and  in  the  spirit 
I  i^*"  *''^  person  of  Christ,  or  Christ  in  the  ficsh)  the  hope  of  glory. 
I  What  will  ihc  Lord  Jesus  one  day  say  to  these  sleepy  watchmen, 
never  tell  the  srcure  world  of  their  enemies  at  the  door? 
d  diven  colors  and  )irc(i>nces  for  this  course  of  daubing. 
Some  say  this  savors  of  an  Old  Testament  spirit,  which 
I  jru  wont  |o  wound,  and  then  lo  heal ;  to  humble,  and  Ihon  to  - 
■  10» 




raise ;  to  preach  law,  and  then  gospel ;  but  now  we  are  (o 
be  mini^lers  of  the  New  Testament,  and  let  no  law  be  heard 
of.  I  conress,  ihoae  that  preach  the  law  as  Ihe  means  of  our 
justiBofltion,  and  aa  the  matter  of  our  righieouaness,  wiihout 
Christ,  or  together  with  Christ,  as  the  false  teachers  did,  (2  Cur. 
iii.  6.)  may  well  be  called  (as  Paul  calls  them)  ministers  of  thet 
letter,  not  of  the  spirit,  of  the  Old  Tesiameni,  not  of  the  New ; 
but  to  preach  Christ  plainly  and.  with  open  face  the  end  of  the 
Inw,  and  to  preach  the  law  as  the  means  to  prepare  for,  and 
advance,  Christ  in  our  hearis,  can  never  be  proved  1o  be  the 
Old  Testament  ministry,  or  to  put  a  vail  upon  men's  hearts  that 
they  can  not  see  the  end  of  the  law,  (as  the  Old  Testament  vail 
did,  2  Cor.  iii.  14,)  but  it  is  to  take  away  the  vail  of  all  conceit 
of  man's  own  strength  and  righteousness,  by  seeing  his  curse, 
that  so  he  may  fly  to  the  end  thereof,  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  em- 
brace him  for  righteousness.  For  the  ajiostle  doth  not  call  theni 
ministers  of  ihe  letter  and  of  the  Old  Testament  because  they 
did  preach  the  law  to  the  humble  and  lead  unto  Christ,  but  be- 
cause they  preached  the  law  for  righteousnesa  without  Christ, 
whom  he  ealb  the  spiril,  (ver.  17,)  and  therefore  calls  them  the 
ministers  of  the  letter,  and  their  ministry  of  death  and  condem- 
nation: there  is  something  in  the  law  which  U  of  perpetual  use, ' 
and  something  which  is  but  for  a  lime  —  the  vit  coactiva  lepit,  (as 
■ome  call  it,)  i.  e.,  the  force  of  the  law  to  condemn  and  curse, 
to  hold  a  man  under  the  curse,  and  to  hold  a  man  under  the 
power  of  sin,  which  the  apostle  calls  the  strength  of  the  law, 
(I  Cor-  XV.  56.)  is  but  for  a  time,  and  is  hut  accidental  to  the 
law,  and  may  be  separated  from  it,  and  is  separated  indeed  from 
it  as  soon  as  ever  the  soul  is  in  Christ,  (Rom.  viii.  1 ;)  he  is  then 
free  from  the  obligation  of  it  to  perform  personol  and  perfect 
obedience  to  it,  that  so  he  may  he  just ;  idso  from  the  maledic- 
tion and  curse  of  it,  if  be  be  not  thus  just.  But  that  which  is  I 
of  perpetual  use  in  it,  is  not  only  the  directive  power  of  it,  but 
this  preparing  and  humbling  virtue  of  it ;  tor  if  all  men  by  na- 
ture, Jews  and  Gentiles,  are  apt  to  be  puffed  up  with  their  own 
righteousness,  and  to  ble^  themselves  in  their  own  righteousness, 
and  so  to  feel  no  such  need  of  Christ,  then  this  humbling  work 
of  the  law  to  slay  men  of  all  their  fond  conceits  and  foolish  con- 
fidence in  their  own  righteousness,  and  to  make  men  feel  the 
horrible  nature  of  sin,  by  revealing  the  curse  and  malediction 
due  to  it,  is  of  moral  and  perpetual  use.  And  hence  it  is,  that 
though  the  gospel,  strictly  taken,  (as  is  intimated  Thesis  llfl,) 
hath  no  terror  properly  in  it,  because  thus  it  reveals  nothing  but 
recoDciliatiou  through  Christ's  righteousness  applied  by  faith, 


yet  the  gospel  larirely  taken,  for  tliat  doctrine  whirh  reveals  ifaa 
glad  tidings  of  Christ  already  come,  so  ihere  U  terror  in  it,  be- 
cnuse  in  this  respect  the  gospel  makes  use  of  the  law,  and  ( 
firms  what  is  raorni  and  perpetual  therein. 

The  sin  and  terror  which  the  gospel  (largely  taken)  makes 
u^e  of  out  of  the  law  arc  but  Bubservient  to  the  gospel  slrieily 
taken,  or  for  that  which  is  principally  or  more  properly  gospel,  ' 
for  thereby  the  righteousness  and  free  grace  and  lave  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,  and  preciousness  and  greatness  of  both,  are  the  more 
clearly  illustrated.  The  law  of  itself  wounds  and  kills,  and 
rather  drives  from  Christ  than  unto  Cbriot;  but  in  the  bund  of  r 
the  gospel,  or  as  Cbri-«t  handles  it,  so  it  drives  tlie  soul  unto/ 
Christ,  and  (as  hath  been  shown)  is  the  means  to  that  end  ;  and 
it  is  a  most  fidse  and  nauseous  doctrine  to  alHrm  that  love  only 
draws  the  soul  to  Christ,  unless  it  be  unilerslood  with  this  cau- 
tion and  notion,  viz.,  love  ns  revealed  to  a  sinner,  and  condemned 
for  sin  ;  which  sin  and  condemnation  as  the  law  makes  known, 
to  the  gospel  makes  use  of  to  draw  unto  Christ.  If,  indeed, 
the  go»pel  did  wineTare  ut  caintraret,  i.  e.,  nound  that  it  may 
wound  and  terrify  only,  (which  the  law  doth,)  tlien  it  (sjiith  Clia- 
mier)  was  all  one  with  law,  (which  Bellarmin  pleads  for;)  but 
when  it  wounds  that  it  may  heal,  this  U  not  contrary,  but  agree- 
able, to  the  oilii^e  of  a  good  physician,  whose  chief  work  is  to  heati  , 
and  may  well  suit  with  the  healing  ministry  of  the  Lord  Je^ua; 
and  hence  we  see,  thai  although  Christ  was  sent  to  preach  the 
gospel,  yet  he  ciune  to  confirm  the  law  in  the  ministry  of  the 
gospel,  and  therefore  shows  the  spiritual  sins  against  the  law 
more  clearly,  and  the  heavy  plagues  for  the  breach  of  it  more 
fully,  than  the  scribes  and  Pharliiees.  He  that  is  angry  with  hia 
brother  is  a  murderer,  and  he  that  calls  him  fool  is  in  danger 
of  hell  fire.  (Matt.  v.  22.) 

Peier  was  no  minister  of  the  Old  Testament  because  he  first 
«nvinced  and  pritiked  the  Jews  to  the  heart  for  their  murder  of 
Christ  Jesus.  Paul  was  no  such  minister  neither,  (whenos  he 
would  evince  our  justtficniion  by  Christ's  righteousness  only,)  in 
tJint  he  begins  and  spends  so  much  time  in  proving  Gentiles  antl 
a  lie  under  sin  and  wrath,  notwithstanding  all  the  excuses 
of  the  one  and  privileges  of  the  other,  as  appears  in  his  three 
first  chapters  to  the  Romans ;  but  herein  they  were  gospel  prcouh-- 
en.  Nor  can  it  with  any  color  of  reason  be  thought  that  the 
prophet!  in  the  Old  Testament  were  herein  ministers  of  t)ie 
,  when  they  did  first  wound,  and  then  heal ;  lir»t  humble 
by  the  law,  and  then  i^vive  by  the  gospel.  M.  Saltmarsh  hath 
b«eii  ao  blinded  with  ihu  notion  of  the  Old  Testament  ministry, 



lie  THB   JIORALITV   OF  THE   S\ltniTIt. 

tbnt  >0  nvike  tliia  dm  of  the  law-  in  preaching  the  gospel,  or  (o 
hold  foNh  the  promises  of  gr.iue  lo  them  thai  are  qiialilitt]  with 
the  grace,  of  thu  promise,  {us  tlie  Old  Te^>lumpnt  pruphcU  did,)  is 
lo  give  (us  he  thinks)  ihe  wine  of  llie  gosjiei  burning  hot.  «s  ihe 
cmelous  genlleman  did  lo  his  gliosis :  mid  ai)other  (n'ltom  I  sjiare 
to  name)  professeih  that  the  Old  Testament  (I)ecau6e  it  urgelh 
tlie  law  lo  humble)  contaiaetli  little  good  news,  but  much  bad 
news ;  but  now,  when  Cliriet  saith,  "  Go,  preaeli  the  goapel," 
thereby  he  would  have  them  (lie  saiih)  miiiiBiere  of  the  New 
Tesiameot  to  preneh  glad  tidings,  (nothing  but  gospel,)  but  no  bad 
tidings,  (not  a  jot  of  the  law,}  until  mt-o  po!>ilively  reject  the  glad 
tidings  of  Ihe  gospel.  If  iheae  men  speak  true,  then  neither 
Peier  in  his  preaching,  nor  I'nul  in  his  writings,  nor  Chriet  him- 
self in  his  ministry,  were  mimsters  of  the  New  Tealament,  but 
did  overheat  their  wine,  and  preach  much  bad  tidings  to  the  peo- 
ple of  tiud.  Verily,  if  this  stuff  be  not  repented  of,  the  Lord 
bath  a  time  to  visit  for  these  inventions. 

2.  Some  object,  (Gal.  iii.  24,  2.^.)  that  the  children  of  the  Old 
Testament  were  under  the  law,  as  their  pedagogue  Id  lead  them 
to  Christ;  but  now  (the  apostle  saith)  we  are  no  longer  under  this 
sel  100 1  master,  who  are  sons  of  God  in  the  New  Testament.  Be 
it  so,  that  the  sons  of  God  under  the  New  Testament  are  past 
the  lerroring  of  ibis  schoolmaster,  is  it  not  ilicn^fore  ibe  work  of 
the  New  Tesiaraeni  ministry  to  preach  the  law  unlo  servants  and 
elaves  lo  sin  and  Satan  in  New  Testnmeni  times?  No,  (saith  the 
same  author,)  for  ihia  is  to  preach  bad  neus ;  this  is  no  gooil 
news  to  i^ay.  Thou  art  condeniTic<l  for  the.<e  things ;  for  the  gospi;! 
saith  thus.  Tliou  pour  drunkard,  thou  proud  wonuui,  here  is  a 
gracious  God  that  hath  loved  thee,  and  sent  Christ  lo  die  for 
thee,  and  ministers  lo  nmke  it  known  to  thee,  and  here  is  ever- 
lasting salvation  by  him  only,  beciiu^  ihou  ai-t  a  sinner;  thou 
art  now  free  Irom  damnation :  fear  nut  that,  Christ  bath  loved 
thee,  therefore  obey  him  ;  if  not,  thou-shalt  not  be  damned,  ibat 
is  done  away  already,  etc.  1  would  know  whether  a  proud  wo- 
man, or  a  poor  drunkard,  a  villain,  who  never  jet  believed,  are 
in  a  stale  of  eondemnation,  ay  or  no?  I  have  read  indeed  timt 
"  there  is  no  condemnation  lo  them  ttiat  are  in  Christ,"  (Hum.  viii. 
1 .)  but  never  of  any  sui-h  fi-eedom  to  them  that  are  out  of  Christ, 
iinlc^  it  was  only  in  desiinulion  and  merit;  and  I  hare  read 
that  we  arc  by  nature  children  of  wrath,  while  dead  in  sin; 
(Kph.  ii.  l-S:)  hut  never  of  this,  vis.,  that  we  are  in  favor 
while  we  be  in  our  sin,  much  less  that  we  arc  lu  believe  this 
It',  therefore,  such  persona  be  iu  a  stale 
ind  condemnMion,  ia  not  tbis  like  the  old 


fiil*c  prophets,  crying  peace,  peaiw,  and  snlTalion,  where  ihere  is 
no  pence  ?  "  There  is  no  peace  to  ihe  vrickeil,  saiih  mj  (lod."  (Isi 
xlviil.  utu  :  Kii.  nil.)  This  is  truth  before  tbcy  reject  the  gos- 
pel, is  it  not  ?  This  ilie  law  saith  (say  some)  true,  but  is  noi 
tills  confirmed  by  the  ministry  of  the  gospel  also  ?  (John  iii.  ult.) 
He  that  believes  not,  the  wrath  of  God  abides  upon  him,  frti 
in  a6iu»-  it  was  upon  him  before  he  did  believe ;  and  when  he 
believes  not,  it  abides  where  it  did.  Must  the  ministers  of  the 
New  Teat&menl,  therefore,  prench  lies  and  talshoods,  and  tell 
proud  women,  and  poor  drunkards,  and  villains,  before  they  re- 
fuse the  gospel  by  unbelief,  that  the  Lord  Jesus  loves  them, 
*and  that  they  need  not  fear  condemnation,  when  the  Scripture 
hath  shut  up  all  men  under  it,  that  the  promise  by  faith  might  be 
given  to  those  that  believe,  and  them  only  ?  What  ia  this  gos- 
pel ministry  but  to  tell  men  they  are  whole,  and  not  sick  to 
death,  but  healed  before  they  come  to  the  Physician,  the  Lord 
Jesus  ?  Surely  that  is  gospel  ministry  which  advanceih  Christ 
not  only  in  word  but  in  power  in  the  hearts  of  poor  sinners  ;  but 
doth  this  ministry  advance  the  physician's  custom  and  honor, 
vhicb  where  it  comes  must  first  tell  all  the  crew  of  wretched  drunk- 
ards, proud  persons,  and  villains,  that  they  arc  already  well  and 
whole,  loved  and  piu'doned,  blessed  and  saved,  before  ever  they 
come  to  Ihe  Lord  Jesus  ?  Suppose  therefore  (as  some  may  say) 
tbot  servants  and  slaves  to  sin  may  have  the  law  preached  to 
them,  yet  the  sons  and  children  of  Giod  have  no  use  of  it  in  that 
respect  now  ;  it  is  true,  I  grant,  not  as  the  servants  have  under  the 
New  Testament,  nor  yet  as  the  sons  of  God  had  under  the  Old  ; 
for  the  children  of  God  under  the  Old  Testament  had  need  of  ibis 
achoolraasler  to  lead  them  to  Christ  to  come,  and  ad  Chrittum 
^fpieum,  i.  e.,  to  Christ  typed  out  in  sacrifices  and  oblatious,  high 
priest  and  altar,  and  so  it  led  them  to  Christ  afar  olf,  and  as  it 
were  a  great  way  about ;  but  it  doth  not  follow  that  there  is 
no  use  of  the  law  therefore  to  be  a  schoolmaster  still  to  lead  unto 
Christ  immediately  and  already  come  ;  those  that  are  servants 
to  tin  under  the  New  Testament  have  need  of  the  law  to  dhow 
them  the  condemnation  and  curse  under  which  they  lie  by  na- 
ture and  are  now  actually  under;  but  the  sons  of  God  (for  whom 
Christ  is  made  a  curse)  are  not  thus  under  it,  and  therefore  have 
Dot  this  use  of  it,  but  only  to  show  that  curse  and  condemnation 
which  they  do  of  themselves  deserve;  and  therefore  the  holy 
■poatle,  when  be  was  in  Christ,  and  did  live  unto  God,  he 
^owB  us  how  he  did  live  unto  God,  viz.,  by  dying  to  the  luw, 
and  how  he  did  die  tu  the  law,  and  that  was  by  the  law,  i.  c.,  as 
it  did  show  him  his  condemnation ;  he  did  live  to  God  in  his 


118  THE    SIORALITV    OF    THE  -SABBATn. 

justitlcAtion  ;  as  it  did  show  liim  liissin,  nm]  wbdIs,  and  weakness, 
it  mndfi  Lim  die  unlo  it,  and  espeut  uo  lilb  from  it,  and  eo  live 
imlo  God  in  his  BanctiKcalion ;  for  so  ihe  words  are,  "  I  throueh 
thn  Inw  am  dfad  lo  the  law,  thai  !  mny  live  unlo  God,"  (Gal. 
ii.  19  ;)  thn  ifAue  thererore  is  this,  that  if  ihe  doctrine  be  t&kua 
strictly  pro  legejidei,  (as  Chamier  calls  il,)  or  ihat  doctrine  which 
ehows  the  yay  of  man's  righteousness  and  juslifleBtiun  only, 
there  iiidt^d  all  the  works  of  tlie  law,  nil  lerrara  and  threal- 
nings,  are  to  be  excluded,  and  nothing  else  bnt  peace,  pardon, 
pTBCv,  favor,  eternal  reronciliation  to  be  believed  and  received  ; 
and  therefore  il  is  no  New  Testament  ministry  lo  urge  the  law, 
or  to  thnnder  out  any  terror  here,  for  in  this  sense  it  is  true 
(which  is  commonly  received)  that  in  ihe  law  there  are  terrors, 
but  in  the  gospel  none;  buf  if  ihe  gospel  be  taken  largely  for 
all  that  doctrine  which  brings  glad  tidings  of  Christ  already 
come,  and  shows  the  love  of  God  in  the  largest  extent  of  it,  and 
the  illustrations  and  confirmationH  of  it  from  the  law,  then  such 
servants  of  Jesus  Christ  who  hold  forth  the  law  to  make  way  for 
grace,  and  lo  illustrate  Christ's  love,  must  either  be  accounted 
New  Testament  ministers,  or  else  (as  hath  been  shown)  Christ 
1^  Jesus  and  his  apostles  were  none. 

^~  Thesii  1 15.  The  second  is  a  professed  neglect,  and  casting 
'  olf  tiiQ  work  of  repentance  and  mourning  for  sin,  nay,  of  asking 
pardon  of  sin  ;  for,  if  Ihe  law  be  no  rule  to  show  man  his  duty,  why 
sliould  any  man  then  trouble  himself  with  sorrow  for  any  sin? 
For  if  il  Ije  no  rule  to  him,  how  should  any  tiling  he  ain  to  him  F 
k  and  if  so,  why  then  should  any  ask  pardon  of  it,  or  mourn 
I  jilpder  it  ?  Why  should  not  a  man  rather  harden  his  heart  like  an 
fldamam,  and  make  his  forehead  brass  and  iron,  even  unlo  the 
death,  against  the  feeling  of  any  sin  ?  Uul  what  doctrine  is  more 
cross  lo  tlie  s^iirit  of  grace  in  gospel  times  than  thin?  which  is  a 
spirit  of  mourning;  (2ach.  xii.  10,  11  ;)  what  doctrine  more 
cross  to  the  command  of  Christ  from  heaven  than  this  ?  who 
writes  from  heaven  to  the  church  of  Ephesus,  lo  remember 
frora  whence  she  is  fallen,  and  repent ;  (Rev.  ii.  5  ;)  wliai  doc- 
trine more  cross  to  ihe  example  of  holy  men  than  this:  ?  who  after 
they  were  converted  then  repented  and  lamented  most  of  all; 
(Jer.  xxxi.  18,  1!*;  2  Cor.  vii.  9-11  ;)  what  doctrine  more 
cross  to  the  salvation  of  souls,  the  mercy  of  God,  and  forgiveness 
of  sin  ?  lor  so  the  promise  mna,  "  If  we  confess  our  sins,  he  ia 
faithful  and  just  to  tbi^ive  us  our  sins."  (1  John  i.  9.)  What  doc- 
trine so  cross  to  the  spirit  of  Ihe  love  of  Christ  shed  abroad  in  the 
heart,  ihat  when  a  man's  sins  are  greatest,  (which  is  after  conver- 
beCHUse  now  against  more  love  and  more  nearness  lo  Jesui 


^H  muuemiing? 
^H  ia  sweet  and  g 
^B  ing  great  who 
^^m  tame  subject, 
^V   cation,  and  ihi 


I  ghouli]  l>e  kost  monkish  and 
I  lonlhsoiue,  but  godly  sorrow 

believer's  soi 
muuemiing?      Sorrow  indeed 

fa  sweet  and  glorious  ;  doubtless  tbme  ineu'ii  bliodneiis  b  exceed- 
b^  great  who  know  not  bow  to  reconcile  joy  and  sorrow  in  the 
■ame  subject,  who  ean  not  with  one  eye  bt^liold  llieir  free  justiH- 
cation,  and  therein  diiil;  rejoice,  nnd  the  weakness  and  imper- 
fection   of  ibeir  justificiilion   with    another  eye,   and  for  that 

Tlietit  116.     Tbe  third  thinj;  ift,  a  denying  sun ctiticntiot 

honor  of  »  fuiihful  and  true  witness,  or  clear  evidence  of  ou^l 

f    ju»lilicalion  ;/for  if  a  believer  be  not  bound  to  look  unto  the  law  | 

I  lu  hie  rule,  whj  shootd  he  then  have  any  eye  to  bin  sanctilicalia 

I   which  is  nothing  else  but  our  habitual  conformity  to  tlie  law,  as 

f    inherent  corruption  is  nothing  else  but  babilual  disiigrecment  j 

with  it ;  although  sanctificiitiun  be  no  part  of  our  rigbteousneuT 

before  God,  and  in  this  «ensc  U  no  evidence  of  our  justification,  [ 

yet  there  is  scarce  any  clearer  trutli  in  all  the  Scripture  than  J 

litis,  viz.,  that  it  is  evidence  that  a  man  is  in  a  juBtified  estate^ 

L  Jiodyet  this  leaven,  which  denies  the  law  to  be  a  Christian's  rule 

I  sf  life,  hath  soured  some  men's  spirits  against  this  way  of  evi- 

\  duDcing.     It  is  a  doublfid  evidence,  («ailh  Doctor  Crisp,)  an  ar- 

■  gument.  not  an  evidence  ;  it  is  a  carnal  and  an  inferior  evidence, 
I  Ihc  litst  and  the  least,  not  the  first  evidence;  it  is  an  evidence,  if 
\,  JustiKcfttion  be  first  evident,  (say  Den  and  Saltmiirsli,)  some  men 
I  may  be  led  to  these  ojiinions  from  otiier  principles  tlian  a  plain 
I  denial  of  the  directive  0£<i  of  the  law  ;  hot  this  I  feur  lies  undcr- 
w  »ost:  however,  let  these  two  things  be  examined  :  — 

I        K  Wliether  sancliacalion  be  a  doubtful  evidence. 

I        2.  Whether  it  be  a  carnal,  inferior,  and  may  not  be  n  firat 

I   evidence. 

I       llitma  117.     If  to  be  under  the  power  and  dominion  of  sin 

I  And  nriginul  corruption  be  u  sure  and  i-erluin  evidence  of  actual 

I  eondemnaiion,  so  thai  he  that  suiili  he  knows  Chriet  and  liuth  fel- 

I  lowship  with  him,  and  yi'I  walks  in  darkness,  and  keepn  not  bis 

I  eommnndments,  is  a  linr,  (1  John  i.  C;  ii.    4.)    why  may  not 

I  Mnclincalioti  then  (whereby  we  are  ^et  free  from  the  power  of 

L  iin)  Iw  a  »ure  and  certain  evidence  of  our  actual  justification  'i 

■  For  hereby  "  we  knuw  that  we  know  him,  if  we  keep  his 
K'DOminaudiDenls,"  (1  John  ii.  3;)  whereby  it  is  manifei;!  ikat 
K'lbe  aiMSlle  is  not  of  llieir  minds  who  think  the  negative  (o 
P  fcii  true,  vix.,  that  ihcy  that  keep  not  Christ's  commaudmcnls  ai-e 
t  In  a  ■late  of  perdition  ;  but  they  will  not  make  llu:  ullirmalive  true, 
L  la.,  that  they  that  keep  Ids  i^jjuraandments  may  tliereby  know 
BdttU  they  are  in  a  slate  of  talvatiou;  if  Jesus  Christ  be  wnt  "to 






bless  his  people  in  turning  them  from  theii-  iniqaitieB,"  (Acta 
iii.  ult.,)  iben  they  thai  know  they  are  turned  from  their  iniqui- 
ties by  liim  may  know  certainly  that  they  are  blessed  in  him  ; 
and  it  they  be  not  thus  turned,  they  may  know  certainly  that 
they  arc  yet  accursed.  If  godltne^  hath  the  promises  of  this  life 
and  that  which  is  to  come,  (1  Tim.  tv.  8,)  and  if  the  free  grace 
and  actual  love  of  God  be  revealed  clearly  to  us  only  by  some 
promise,  how  then  is  sanctifi cation  («o  near  akin  to  godliness) 
excluded  from  being  any  evidence  ?  Is  lliere  no  inherent  grace 
in  a  believer  that  no  inherent  sanclification  can  be  a  true  ei-i- 
dence  ?  Verily,  thus  some  do  think ;  but  what  is  this  but  an 
open,  graceless  professiOD  that  every  believer  is  under  the  power 
of  inherent  sin,  if  he  hath  not  the  being  of  any  inherent  gi;ace  ? 
or  if  there  be  any  inherent  grace,  yet  it  is  (say  some)  so  mixed 
with  corruption,  nnd  is  such  a  spotted  and  blurred  evidence,  thitt 

I  confess  such  an  answer  would  well  become  a  blind  Papist 
who  never  knew  where  grace  grew,  (for  so  they  dispute  against 
oertiCado  talitlit  eertitudine  Jidei,  when  the  concltwion  of  faith 
arifeih  from  such  a  proposition  as  is  the  word  of  God,  and  the 
assumption  the  testimony  of  God's  Spirit  to  a  man's  own  expieri- 
cncfl  of  the  work  of  God  in  his  heart,)  hut  it  ill  becomes  a  minis- 
ter of  the  gospel  of  Christ  to  plead  for  such  Popish  ignorance  in 
a  Christian  as  can  see  no  farther  than  his  own  buttons,  and  that 
can  not  discern  by  the  Spirit  of  God  (he  great  and  wonderful 
,  change  from  darkness  to  light,  from  death  Co  life,  from  Satan  to 
God,  the  visible  work  of  (jod,  and  graces  of  the  Spirit  of  God. 
The  things  (which  the  aposile  calls  love)  "are  freely  given  to 
them  of  God."  (1  Cor.  ii.  12.)  Peter's  was  imperfect,  blotted, 
and  mixed,  and  yet  be  could  say,  "  Lord,  thou  knowest  I  love 
thee."  (John  ixi.  17.)  The  poor  doubting,  mourning  man  in 
the  gospel  had  some  faith,  and  was  able  to  see  it,  and  say,  cer- 
tainly, "  Lord,  I  btlieve  ;  help  my  unbelief."  Could  Paul  discern 
(without  extraordinary  revelation,  because  he  speaks  as  an  ordi-  _ 
nary  Christian)  an  inner  man,  and  a  taw  in  his  mind,  delighting 
in  the  law  of  God,  yet  mixed  with  a  law  in  his  members,  lead- 
|ng  him  captive  into  the  law  of  sin,  and  can  not  we  ?  And  yet 
I  the  doctor  doth  cast  such  stains  upon  sincerity,  universal  obedi- 
ence, love  to  the  brethren,  etc.,  and  heaps  Up  the  same  cavils 
against  the  truth  of  them  in  the  souls  of  the  eaiols,  as  the  devil 
himself  usually  doth  by  sinful  suspicions  and  suggeHtions,  when 
JGpd  lets  him  loose  for  a  season  to  buffet  his  people,'/liat  so  they 
may  never  know  (if  it  wure  possible)  what  great  things  the  Lord 
kaih  done  for  their  souls ;  and  whoever  reads  bis  book  shall  find 



^B  or 

^      nl 

:    HORAI.ITY    ■ 

that  he  makes  a  believer  sueh  a  crealure  na  can  not  lull  certainly 
whether  lie  lie  a  sincere-bearied  man  or  an  arrant  hypoerile ; 
"  whether  he  be  under  the  power  of  sin  and  Satan  or  not ;  whether 
s  Loan  can  be  discerned  from  another  to  be  a  anint  or  a  devil ; 
whether  he  hath  any  charily  and  love  to  them  that  are  saints 
from  them  that  are  not;  and  so  goes  ahout  lo  befool  and  non- 
pliu  and  puEzle  the  people  of  God,  as  the  slory  related  of  iba 
German  woman,  desiroua  to  rid  tlie  house  of  her  htisband,  who 
fir«I  making  him  drunk,  and  casting  him  into  u  sleep,  did  so  shave 
him  and  dress  him,  and  cut  and  clip  him,  that  when  he  awakened 
he  knew  not  what  lo  think  of  himself,  or  to  say  who  he  was  ;  for 
by  looking  upon  and  in  himself  he  thought  he  was  the  woman's 
husband,  and  yet  by  his  new  cut  and  hahit  he  almost  believed 
that  he  was  a  friar,  as  his  wife  affirmed.  San ctili cation  is  an 
evidence  always  in  itself  of  a  justified  estate,  although  it  be  not 
■Iways  evident  unto  us  ;  and  therefore,  what  though  a  Christiun 
■ees  his  sanctilication  luid  graces  to-dity,  and  can  not  see  them, 
but  is  doubtful  about  them,  suppose  to-morrow,  shall  he  there- 
fore reject  it  as  a  doubtful  evideuce,  which  is  ever  clear  enough 
in  itielf,  though  not  always  to  our  discerning  ?  For  I  would 
what  evidence  can  there  be  of  a  justified  estate,  but  partly 
through  dimness  and  weakness  of  faith,  (which  is  but  imperfe 
and  therefore  mixed  with  some  doublings  all  a  man's  life, 

3  or  other,)  and  partly  through  the  wise  and  adored  provi- 
dences of  God  to  exercise  our  faith,  but  that  some  time  or  other 
n  not  be  discerned  ?  Is  the  immediate  testimony  of  Gotfs 
t  (which  some  would  make  the  only  evidence)  lUways  evi- 
dent, and  the  shinings,  sbeddings,  and  actings  of  it  never  sus- 
pended, but  that  by  some  means  or  other  they  will  be  at  a  loss  ? 
Why  then  should  sanctification  bo  excluded  as  a  doubtful  evi- 
deoee,  because  sometimes  it  is,  and  at  other  times  not,  discerned '{ 
I  know  there  are  some  who.  perceiving  the  conceived  uncertainly 
of  all  such  evidences,  have  therefore  found  out  a  strange  caiholi- 
con  for  these  sick  times,  a  sure  way  of  evidencing  and  settling 
I's  consciences  in  a  way  of  peai^  and  unshaken  asauraucu 
Uve  of  CRrit't ;  and  therefore  they  make  (whicfi  1  name 
»rror)  the  siglTt  of  corruption  and  sinful  perdition,  through 
the  promise  of  the  gospel,  the  certain  and  settled  evidence  of  life 
■nd  salvation,  which  opinion,  the  least  1  can  say  of  it  is,  that 
which  Calvin  Miiil  in  l)ie  like  case,  tu  l>e  rxundantU  in  mundum 
/tmrit  Dti  JIagtUttm.     'Woe  lo  the  dark  mountains  of  Wales, 

tmnd  tlie  fat  vallcyp,  lowns,  anil  cities  in  Kngland,  and  sea  coasts 
and  istanib  in  America,  if  ever  this  delusion  take  place  I    And 
y«t  tills  flume  begins  lo  catch,  and  this  infection  lo  spread ;  and 




And       / 
and      / 




Iherefore  I  find  M.  Saltmarsli  nnd  W.  C.  In  speak  out,  nnd 
openly  to  own  llinl  which  llie  Fninili^ilfi  in  formiT  limes  have 
eilher  bt-en  ashameil  or  iifi-aid  to  acknowledge,  and  that  is  this, 
vie,  that  the  promises  of  the  go^'pcl  do  belong  lo  a  sinner,  911a 
sinnur,  or  &s  a  sinner,  and  tliat  the  law  speaks  good  news  to  a 
righteous  man,  quatema  a  rigiiteous  man,  Lut  the  gospel  quite 
coiitrar}'' ;  it  is  to  &  man  qnaUniu  n  sinner,  not  as  a  regenerate 
man,  or  as  a  humble  man,  or  ns  a  saint,  or  as  a  believer,  but  aa 
B  rinntn  and  lieni^e  they  inrer.  that  a  Christian  will  never  have 
liny  settled  peace,  but  bo  olTand  on,  as  a  bone  ont  of  joint,  in  and 
nut,  a  reeil  lossed  with  the  wind,  never  knit  to  Christ,  if  ihey 
lay  hold  tin  Christ  and  Goil's  love  under  any  other  consideration 
than  as  to  sinners';  and  therefore,  tliough  they  see  no  good  in 
tliemselveg,  though  they  be  not  humbled,  brok en-hen r led  sinners, 
(as  one  preaclter  tells  Ihcm.)  nor  believing  sinners,  (as  another 
preacher  tella  them,)  yet,  if  ihey  see  themselves  sinners,  they 
must  know  a  sinner  is  the  proper  object  of  the  gospel,  and  there- 
fore this  is  ground  enough  to  believe ;  so  that  if  the  devil  tell  a 
man  thai  he  is  no  saint,  if  the  soul  can  nay,  I  am  a  sinner;  tfUio 
devil  say,  Tliou  art  a  hypocrite :  Ay,  but  a  hypocriie  is  but  »^^a 
still ;  though  I  be  not  a  broken-hearted,  this  will  be  (th|Asaj)  a 
refuge  of  peace  to  j'etreat  unto  in  all  temptations;  and  *hen  men 
have  learnt  this  lesson,  their  souls  will  not  he  in  and  out  any 
more,  but  have  constMil  peace;  for  though  ihey  have  nn  interest 
in  Christ  as  saints,  yet  they  have  real  interest  in  the  promises  of 
Christ  ns  sinners ;  hence  also,  they  say,  that  no  minister  is  10 
threaten  or  declare  ihe  curse  and  wrath  of  God  against  drunkards 
tnd  sinners,  as  such,  until  first  Christ  be  offered  in  the  gospel, 
and  tliey  refuse  him,  and  that,  if  any  do  this,  they  are  ministers 
of  the  Old  Testament,  not  of  the  New.  Sic  desinit  in  piseein 
tnulier  formoia.  Lot  us  therefore  see  what  chaff  and  what  corn, 
Tvhni  trurii  and  what  falsehood,  there  is  in  ihis  new  divinity.  / 

It  is  true,  I.  That  Ihe  gospel  reveals  the  free  grace  and  love 
of  God,  the  death  of  Christ,  and  salvation  by  him  for  poor  sin- 
ners, and  that  all  those  that  are  or  shall  be  saved  are  to  ac- 
knowledge and  aggravate  God's  love  toward  them,  in  casting  bis 
eye  upon  them  when  they  were  sinners,  notwithstanding  all  their 
sins  ;  this  the  Scripture  every  where  holds  forth.  (Horn.  v.  6.  7. 
1  Tim.  i.  19.)  '2,  It  is  true,  also,  that  the  gospel  makes  an  offer 
fif  Christ,  and  salvation  and  remission  of  ains  to  all  sinners,  where 
'  it  comes,  yea,  to  all  sinners,  us  sinners,  and  as  miserable,  yea, 
-  though  Ihey  have  sinned  long  by  unlielief,  as  is  evident,  (llos. 
xiv.  1.  Rev.  iii.  17.  Jer.  iii.  ^2.  Is.  Iv.  1.)  All  are  invited  lo 
eonie  unto  iliese  waters  freely,  without  money  or  price.     These 


things  no  mnii  doubts  of  timl  knon-s  ihe  gospel ;  but  the  question 
whether  rcniiAsioii  of  sins  ami  rt?Foncitiation  in  the  gospel 
belong  to  sinnera,  but  whether  they  belong  to  sinners  immedi-  t, 
aiely  as  xinners ;  not  whether  they  are  meritud  by  Christ's  death,  ' 
and  ofTcrrd  out  of  hU  rich  gntce  imtnediately  lo  sinners,  bttt 
•  whether  they  are  actually  and  iinmt^d lately  their  own.  so  ns  they 
may  challenge  them  thus  as  their  own,  from  this  as  Troro  a  fall 
and  sufficient  evidence,  viz.,  because  ihey  are  sinnerfi,  and  because 
Hwy  sM  ihomselvea  tinners.  For  wo  grant  that  Jesus  Christ 
came  into  the  world  actually  to  save  sinnurs,  yet  mediately  by 
fiHtb,  and  then  they  may  see  salvation;  that  he  Jiisiifieth  also  the 
ongoilly.  liul  how?  immediately?  No,  but  mediHiety  hy  faith. 
(Rom.  iii.  5.)  and  that  where  sin  abounds,  grace  aboumls.  To 
whom?  loallsinnere?  No;  but  mediately  loallthnaeonlywliobjr 
faith  receive  this  grace,  (Rom.  v.  17;)  so  (hat  the  gospel  reveals  no  ^  , 
actual  love  and  reconciliation  immedintely  to  n  sinner,  as  a  sinner, 
but  mediately  to  a  sinner,  as  a  believing  and  broken-hearted  sin- 
ner; and  the  Scripture  is  so  clear  in  this  point,  that  whoever 
doubts  of  it  mu^t  eacutire  «um  mle,  and  we  may  say  to  them,  as 
Pi^l  to  the  Galatians,  **  0,  foolish  men,  who  hath  bewitched 
yoii  Uint  you  should  not  see  this  truth?"  For  though  Christ 
came  lo  save  sinners,  yet  he  professeth  that  he  came  not  to  call 
(he  righteous,  hut  the  sick  sinners,  (Malt.  \x.  13;)  though  God 
jusIiHetli  the  ungodly,  yet  it  is  such  an  ungodly  man  as  believelh 
in  htm.  whose  faith  is  imputed  unto  righteousness,  (Kom.  iii.  5;) 
though  grace  abounds  where  sin  abounds,  yet  it  is  not  to  all  sin- 
ners, (lor  then  all  should  be  saved,)  but  to  such  as  receive  abun- 
dance of  grace  by  faith,  (Rom.  v.  iV;)  although  God  holds  tonh 
Chrii-I  to  be  a  propitiation  for  sinners,  yet  it  is  expressly  said  to 
be  mediately  through  faith  in  his  blood,  (Itom.  iii.  24,  2^  ;)  al- 
ihuugh  tlie  Scripture  hath  concluded  all  uiulcr  sin,  that  the  prom- 
ise might  be  given,  yet  it  is  not  said  to  be  immediately  given  to 
sinners,  as  sinners,  but  mediately  to  all  ihut  believe  t  and  in  ono 
word,  though  it  be  true  that  Christ  died  fur  sinners  and  enemies, 
lliat  ihey  might  have  remission  of  sins,  (then  procured  and  mer- 
ited for  ibeui,)  yet  we  never  actually  have  nor  receive  this  re- 
mission (and  consequently  can  not  see  it)  as  our  own,  until  we  do 
believe;  for  unto  this  truth  (saith  Peler)  do  alt  the  prophets 
wiineM,  that ''  whosoever  bvlieveth  in  him  shall  receive  remission 
of  sins,"  (Acts  X.  4.1 ;)  and  hence  it  is,  that  aa  all  the  prophets 
preached  the  actual  fuvnr  of  God  only  to  sinners  as  believers,  so 
the  apostles  never  preuchi-d  it  in  New  Testament  times  otherwise ; 
and  hcnee  Peter  (AcIh  ii.  3S)  duth  not  tell  the  sorrowful  Jowa 
that  they  were  linnere,  and  that  God  loved  ibem,  and  that  Christ 




'hud  died  for  lliem,  and  tiint  thoir  eina  were  pnrdoncd.  because 
they  were  .sinners;  bul  he  first  uxhoris  iheni  lo  rcpeni,  that  so 
they  miglK  receive  remission  of  ains;  nordolh  Paul  lell  any  man 
that  salvation  belonged  to  liim,  because  he  is  a  sinner,  but  if  thou 
believe  with  all  ihy  heart  tliou  slialt  be  saved.  (Rom.  x,  5-7.) 
If  tbe  love  of  God  be  reve:iled  lo  n  sinner,  as  a  sinner,  this  must 
be  either,  1.  By  the  witness  of  the  luw  ;  but  Ibis  is  impossible,  for 
if  the  curse  of  God  be  herein  revealed  only  to  a  sinner,  as  a  sin- 
ner, then  the  luvo  of  God  ciui  not;  but  the  law  cur«eih  every 
sinner.  (GaL  iii.  10.)  Or,  2.  By  the  light  and  witness  of  the 
gospel ;  but  this  cannot  be,  for  it  reveals  life  and  salvation  only 
to  a  believer,  and  confirms  the  Hentencti  of  Ibe  law  against  such 
a  sinner  as  believes  not.  (John  iii.  17,36.)  "  He  that  believes  not 
is  condemned  already,"  not  only  for  unbelief,  (as  some  -say,)  for 
this  doth  but  aggravate  condemnation,  but  also  for  sin,  by  which 
uian  is  first  condemned  before  he  believes,  if  ihe  apostle  may  be 
believed,  (Rom.  iii.  19;)  and  if  a  man  be  not  co'ndemned  for  sin 
before  he  believe,  then  he  is  not  a  sinner  before  he  believe  ;  for 
look,  as  Christ  hath  taken  away  any  man's  condemnation  in  his 
death,  just  so  hath  he  taken  away  bis  sin.  3.  Or  else  by  the 
witness  and  teslioiony  of  God's  Spirit ;  but  this  is  flat  contrary 
to  what  the  apostle  speaks.  (Gal.  iii.  20,  with  iv.  6,)  "  Ye  are  all 
the  sons  of  God  by  faith  in  Christ  Jesus;"  and  because  ye  are 
sons,  (not  sinners,}  "he  hath  sent  tbe  Spirit  of  his  Son,  crying, 
Abba,  Father,"  (Gal.  iv.  4-6;)  and,  verily,  if  the  love  of 
God  belong  to  sinners,  as  sinners,  then  all  sinners  shall  cer- 
tainly be  saved,  (for  a  qualeniu  ad  omiie  valet  comeqiitntia  ;)  so 
that  by  this  principle,  as  sin  hath  abounded  actually  to  randemn 
all,  so  grace  hath  abounded  actually  to  save  all,  which  is  most 
pernicious  i  nor  do  I  know  what  should  make  men  embrace  thia 
principle,  unless  that  they  either  secretly  think  that  the  strait 
gate  and  narrow  way  to  life  is  now  wide  and  broad,  that  all  men 
shall  in  gospel  times  enter  in  thereat,  which  is  prodigious,  or  else 
they  must  imagine  some  Arminian  universal  redemption  and  rec- 
onciliation, and  so  put  all  men  in  a  salvable  and  reconciled 
estate  (such  as  it  is)  before  faith,  and  then  the  evidence  and 
ground  of  their  assurance  must  be  built  on  this  false  and  crazy 
tbiindatiou,  viz.,  Jesus  Christ  bad  died  to  reconcile  (and  so  hath 
iled)  all  sinners. 


And  therefor* 
gospel  ministry 
some,)  then  1 

1  am  reconciled.  If  this  be  the  bottom  of  this 
,iid  prcni'hiiig  free  grace,  (as  doubtless  it  is  in 
uld  say  these  things  only;  — 

1.  That  this  doctrine,  under  a  color  of  free  grace,  doth  as  n 


I^ilify  and  lake  off  the  price  of  free  gr»ee  in  Christ's  death  aai 
my  I  kniiw  ;  I'or  what  ean  villfV  tliis  gi-mre  of  Chriai  more,  tbgaj 
tar  Christ  shed  \m  blood  ns  that  Peier  and  Abraham  in 
heaven  shall  have  no  more  c.tuse  lo  thank  Jesus  Clirist  for  his 
love  therein  than  Judns  and  Cuin  in  hell?  it  being  eqimlij  shed 
for  one  us  much  as  for  the  othrr. 
S.  That  litis  is  n  fahe  Itoiiom  for  failh  to  rest  upon  and  gather 
•vidence  from ;  Tor,  1.  If  Chn«i  hath  died  for  all.  lie  will  then 
«criainly  save  all ;  for  »o  Paul  reiuoni,  (Rom.  riil.  SI,  and  \i. 
10;)  he  hath  given  his  Son  to  death  for  us;  how  shall  he  not  but 
with  him  give  us  nil  ot%r  thing!)  ?  and  therefore  he  will  pve 
fiuili.  and  give  rt'[ii-'nlanee,  and  give  perse v*ranee,  iind  give  eior- 
tutl  life  aUo,  which  is  mosi  false.  If  he- did  not  pray  for  all,  then 
he  hitih  not  died  for  all,  (John  svii.  9 :)  which  Srripture  never 
yet  received  scarce  the  show  of  a  rational  answer,  tliough  ttoine 
have  endeavored  it  with  all  willlngne'^s. 

8.  Thai  whereas  by  this  doctrine  they  would  elear  up  thy  way 

1(0  a  full  and  settled  evidence  and  Christian  assunuice,  lljey  do 
hereby  utterly  subvert  the  principal  foundation  of  all  ^eliicdnesa 
■nd  assurance  of  faith,  which  is  this,  viz.,  thai  if  Jesus  Chtist  be 
given  to  death  tor  me.  then  he  will  certainly  give  all  other 
-diings  to  me.  If  we  were  reconciled  to  God  by  the  death  of  his 
Sun.  much  more  shall  we  be  savei)  by  liis  life.  If  Christ  huih 
^ed  and  risen  for  u«.  who  then  shall  condemn  i  who  shall  then 
Mpamie  us  from  God's  tove?  (Uom.  viii.  Si  ;  vi.  9,  lU.)  But 
if  tliey  KbnII  bold  no  such  principles,  I  would  then  know  how  uny 
muii  rtui  Imve  evideut'jj  of  this,  vix.,  that  God  loves  him,  and 
UiHi  Christ  bath  died  lor  him  while  he  is  a  sinner,  and  as  he  is 
>  sinner?  Or  how  any  minisler  of  the  New  Teslamont  can  say 
to  any  man  (under  the  {rawer  of  his  sin*  and  the  devil)  that  he 
is  nut  condemned  for  his  sins,  bill  that  God  loves  him,  and  tiiat 
Chritt  bath  died  for  liim,  without  preaching  falsehoods,  mid  lies, 
and  dreams  of  iheir  own  heart  'f  Fur,  1.  God  halh  not  loved  nor 
elected  all  sinnerf^,  nor  haih  Chrii^i  died  for  all  sinners.  2.  If 
every  man  l>o  in  a  slale  of  condcmniiii<in  before  he  believe  the 
pMjiel.  then  nn  man  can  be  said  to  be  in  a  stale  of  reconciliation, 
tind  tbM  God  huLh  laved  him  until  be  refuse  the  giwpel,  but 
every  man  is  in  a  slate  of  eun<lemnaliui)  before  he  believe,  be- 
miine  our  i^aviiiur  expresfty  telU  us.  ihat  by  fnilh  we  pass  from  t 
death  to  life,  (•lolm  v.  24.)  and  ho  that  halh  not  the  Sun  hath  ' 
not  life,  ( I  John  v.  12:)  and  iheretbre,  if  ihose  he  mini»ioiii  rf 
the  New  Testament  who  flnt  preach  to  all  the  drunkHrds  and 
whoremongers  and  villuiiis  in  a  parish  ihut  God  loves  them, 
thai  Uwy  ar«  reconciled  by  Chrisr*  death,  nnd  that  they  j 
■  11* 




know  it  because  Ihey  are  Binners.  ihen  let  the  heavenB  hear,  and 
the  earth  know,  timt  sll  pui'h  mitiisters  am  false  prophets,  and 
cry  Pence,  peace,  where  God  proclaims  wraih.  and  that  they 
a«]iiit  them  whom  God  condemns  ;  and  if  they  be  ministers  of 
the  Old  Tesiamentl  ppirii,  who  first  show  men  their  condemned 
estate,  and  then  present  God  as  trroth  againHt  lliem  while  ihey 
be  in  their  Rin,  that  so  they  may  prise  and  fly  to  favor  and  free 
grace,  then  such  are  ministers  of  the  Old  TeslnmenI,  and  not  of  the 
Kew,  because  tliey  preach  the  truth ;  and  if  preacliing  the  truth 
be  an  Old  Testament  ministry,  no  wise  man  llien,  I  hope,  will 
deeire  the  new  wine,  for  the  old  is  better.  While  the  lion  sleeps, 
and  God  is  silent,  and  conscience  slumbers,  all  the  beasts  and 
wild  sinners  of  the  world  (and  many  preachers  too)  may  think 
that  there  is  no  terror  in  God,  no  curse  or  wrath  upon  themselves, 
in  the  mid»t  of  the  rage,  increase,  and  power  of  all  their  sins ; 
but  when  this  lion  roars,  and  God  awakens,  and  conscience  looks 
above  head,  they  shall  then  see  how  miserably  'they  have  been 
deceived  ;  they  may  slight  sin.  alwlish  condemnation,  talk  of  and 
wonder  at  free  grace  now,  and  believe  easily,  because  they  are 
Binners;  but  certainly  they  shall  be  otherwise  minded  then. 
Some  men  may  have  good  ends  in  preaching  God's  free  grace 
af^er  this  manner  in  the  gospel,  and  make  the  gospel  a  revelation 
of  God's  actual  love  to  sinners,  as  sinners,  and  make  a  Chris- 
tian's evidence  of  it  nothing  else  but  the  sight  of  his  sin,  and  of 
bis  being  under  the  power  of  it ;  but  little  do  they  think  what 
Satan,  the  father  of  this  fiilse  doctrine,  aims  at,  which  are  these 
fthur  lliinge  chiefly:  — 

1.  That  sanctification.  faith,  etc.,  might  be  no  evidence  at  all 
tc  a  Christian  of  a  good  esiaie,  for  this,  they  say,  is  a  doubtful 
evidence,  and  an  unsettling  wa}'  of  assurance  ;  because  they  will 
hereby  be  as  bones  out  of  joint,  in  and  oui ;  humbled  to-day,  and 
then  comforted  ;  but  hard  hearted  to-morrow,  and  then  at  a  loss ; 
whereas  to  see  one's  self  a  sinner,  that  is  a  constant  evidence, 
for  we  are  always  sinners,  and  the  gospel  proclaims  peace  to 

2.  That  so  men  may  keep  their  lusts  and  sins,  and  yet  keep 
their  peace  loo ;  for  if  peace  be  the  portion  of  a  man  under  the 
power  of  sin  and  Satan,  look  ihen,  as  he  may  have  it,  why  may 
he  not  keep  it  upon  the  same  terms  ?  And  therefore  W.  C. 
saith,  that  if  conscience  objf^cl,  thou  art  a  hypocrite,  (perhaps 
truly ;)  yet  a  hypocrite  is  but  a  sinner,  and  God's  love  belongs 
to  sinners,  as  sinners.  And  if  this  be  thus,  wliat  doth  this  doc- 
trine aim  at  but  to  reconcile  God  and  Belial,  Christ  and  Uum< 
man ;  not  only  to  open  the  door  to  all  manner  of  wickedneas, 
but  to  comfort  meu  therein? 


3.  That  so  he  may  liring  men  in  time  purppsely  to  Bin  tha 
more  fretly,  that  so  they  may  have  llie  (blearer  evidence  of  tha 
love  of  God  ;  for  if  Gotl'a  love  be  revealed  lo  Bionctv,  as  sinners, 
then,  the  more  sinfal,  the  more  denr  evidence  he  hath  of  God'» 
love ;  and  therefore  one  once  entangled  with  these  delusions 
was  induced  to  commit  a  gross  wickedness,  that  more  full  assur- 
ance might  be  attained. 

4.  That  BO  the  true  preacliing  and  ministry  of  tlie  gospel  of 
God's  free  grace  might  be  abolished,  (at  lensi  deRpised.)  which 
is  this,  viz.,  thou  poor,  condemned  sinner,  here  is  Christ  Jesus, 
and  with  him  eternal  remission  of  sins  and  reconriliaiion,  if  thou 
believe  and  receive  this  grace  offered  humbly  and  thankfully, 
for  (bis  is  gospel.  (Matt,  xxviii.  I'J.  filark  xvi.  IC.  Rom.  x. 
5-8 ;  iii.  21,  25.  Acts  viii.  37.)  And  hence  M.  W.  C.  hath 
these  words,  "Tlutt  if  the  gospel  hold  forth  Christ  and  salvstioo 
upon  believing,  (as  many,  saith  he,  preach.)  it  were  then  litUe 
better  tidings  than  the  law."  Ah,  wretched  and  unworthy  speech, 
(hat  when  Jesus  Christ  himself  would  show  the  great  love  of 
God  unto  the  world,  (John  iii.  16,)  ho  makes  it  out  by  two  ex- 
pressions of  it  1.  Thai  the  Father  sent  his  only  Son.  2.  That 
whosoever  did  believe  in  him,  (or  if  they  did  believe  in  him,) 
they  should  have  eternal  life.  The  Lord  shows  wonderful  love, 
that  whoever  believe  may  have  Christ  and  eternal  life  by  believ- 
ing ;  but  this  doctrine  breathing  out  God's  dearest  love,  by  this 
man's  account  is  liiile  belter  than  law,  which  breathes  out  nothing 
but  wrath.     But  why  doth  he  speak  ihufl  ?     Because  (saiih  be) 

isy  lo  keep  the  ten  commandments  as  to  believe  of 
Very  true,  as  lo  believe  of  one's  self.     But  what  is 

't  the  preaching  and  holding  forth  Christ  and  salvatioD 
upon  condition  of  believing?  For  is  not  this  preaching  of  tllo 
gONpel  the  instrument  and  means  of  working  that  faith  in  us 
which  the  Lord  requires  of  us  in  the  gositel  ?  And  must  not 
Jesus  Christ  use  the  means  for  the  end  ?  Were  not  those  throe 
thousand  broughrTiito  Unrliil~by^1anlir  by  Peter's  promise  of 
remission  of  sins  upon  their  repentance?  Were  not  many  filled 
with  the  Holy  Ghost  when  they  heard  this  gospel  thus  preached 
upon  cmndition  of  believing?  (Acts  x.  43.)  Doth  not  ihe  apos- 
''  '.  that  the  gospel  is  the  power  of  God  to  ealvHtiou,  because 
n  is  Christ's  rigbleousnesss  revealed  (not  to  sinners,  as 
sinners)  but  from  faith  to  faith  ?  The  condition  of  works  is 
impossible  to  be  wrought  in  uh  by  the  SpiriL  but  the  condition 
of  faith,  (though  ii  be  imposiijble  for  us  lo  work  it  in  our  hearts.) 
yet  it  is  possible,  easy,  and  usual  for  God  to  work  it  by  requir- 
ing of  it,  (Jer.  iii.  22.)  which  is  do  prejudice  to  God's  free  gnw«, 


123  THE   IIOBALITY    OF   1 

ben\U!«  failli  is  purpos{-ly  required  and  wrouglit,  because  it 
diieHy  hoiioro  and  advancelli  free  grace.  (Rom.  iv.  16.)  Tlie 
promise  \s  of  faiili,  tliat  it  niiylit  be  \iy  grace.  If  Mr.  W.  0. 
will  not  jireai^h  Christ  u;N)n  bidieTing,  how  will  he  nr  any  man 
else  preai^li  it  ?  Will  ihey  tell  all  men  ihal  God  loves  ihem, 
,and  tliitC  Christ  hath  died  for  ihein,  and  tliut  he  ilmt  girea 
grace  and  pulvmion  will  work  failh  in  rhem  ?  Tnily,  thus  W. 
C.  seems  to  atfiriii ;  but  if  they  shall  preach  so  to  all  siimor.s,  as 
sinnai's.  nnd  tell  them  abi^olulely  God  will  work  faiih  in  them 
also,  I  suppose  ihai  tlieclmreh  walls,  jind  plentiful  and  abundant 
experience,  would  teslify  against  tliis  falsehood  ;  and  ilie  Scrip- 
ture teslitiea  sufficiently  that  every  mnn  shall  not  have  faith  to 
whom  [lie  gospel  is  preached.  Now.  I  do  l>eseech  the  God  and 
,  Father  of  lights  lo  pity  his  straying  servant*,  who  are  led  into 
those  deep  and  dangerous  delusions  tbrough  feeble  mistake  of  the 
true  ditrerenee  between  Old  and  New  Testament  ministries,  and 
tliHt  he  woulri  pity  his  people  for  wiiose  sins  God  hath  lei  loose 
these  blinding  and  hardening  duulrines,  by  means  of  wliich  thej 
are  tempted  lo  receive  that  as  the  goapel  of  truth  which  is  but' 
a  mere  lie,  and  lo  take  tlmt  !U  an  evidence  of  salvation  Ihat  is,  in 
trull),  the  evidence  of  perdition  aud  condemnation,  as  hath  been 

7%MI»  1 18.  The  second  thing  remains  to  be  cleared,  whetlier 
eanctili cation  may  not  be  u  first  evidence,  and  thereibre  Biore 
than  a  carnal  inferior  and  last  evidence,  us  M.  Saltmarsh  calls 
it  i  for  if  it  be  (not  a  iluubtfol)  but  a  clear  and  certain  eWdeneo 
in  itself,  (us  haih  been  proved,)  why  miiy  it  nol  be  a  first  evidence? 
Why  may  not  ibe  Spirit  of  God,  wlio  works  it  in  a  person  justi- 
fied, first  reveal  it  as  an  evidence  that  he  is  justified?  What 
mortal  man  can  limit  ijic  Spirit  of  God  to  whal  evidence  he  shall 
first  bring  into  the  conscience  of  a  justified  e«lale  ?  For  li.'i  sanc- 
tificatiun  be  taken  in  the  largest  sense  for  any  work  of  saving 
grace  wrought  in  the  elect,  (whether  in  vocation  to  faith,  or  in 
Ban  cti  Scat  ion.  which,  strictly  taken,  follows  our  justiUcution  by 
faith.)  and  take  evidence  not  for  evidence  of  ihe  object,  (for  Christ 
Jesus  in  his  free  grace  must  be  seen  dm  as  the  ground  an  which 
faith  resle,)  but  tor  evidence  of  testimony  la  the  subject,  and  . 
then  I  Ihus  argue,  that  this  first  evidence  of  special  actual  love 
in  beholding  God's  free  grace  to  a  sinner  is  either, — 

1.  Without  fH?ing  of  tliith  and  other  graces  j  — 

Or.  i.  Wiihout  the  seeing  of  them  only,  tlie  eye  looking  up 
to  Christ  and  free  grace. 

But  this  first  evidence  is  not  without  the  l>eing  of  faith  and 
IioUue^  for  then  it  should  be  lo  »  uiau  actually  uudtr  ihe  power 



of  sin,  *ni  his  filthy  lusts,  and  the  devil ;  which  hllth  been 
olreadj  proved  in  llie  former  Thesis  lo  be  a  mere  delusion  ;  (here 
being  no  such  word  of  the  gospel  which  reve.iU  God's  free  lovB 
And  actual  reconciliation  to  a  sinner,  as  a  sinner,  and  as  under 
the  power  of  hia  sins,  but  the  gospel  rather  reveals  the  quite  contra- 
ry ;  and  to  affirm  the  witness  of  llie  Spirit  clears  thia  up.  is  lo  pre- 
tend a  teatimony  of  the  Spirit  contrary  to  the  testimony  of  the 
word  ;  and  yet  I  strongly  fear,  and  do  fully  believe,  ihal  tliia  is 
•  the  first  evidence  which  men  plead  for,  viz.,  lo  see  God's  love 
toward  them,  while  they  neither  see  grace  nor  any  change  of 
heart  in  them  ;  or  have  grace,  but  are  still  under  the  dominion 
of  their  sin. 

And  on  the  other  side,  if  any  affirm  that  this  evidence  is  not 
without  the  being  of  grace,  but  only  without  the  seeing  of  il.  so 
that  a  Christian's  first  evidence  is  the  feeling  of  God's  free  grace 
out  of  himself,  without  seeing  any  faith  or  grace  in  himself,  and 
seeing  nothing  else  but  sm  m  himself,  this  I  confess  is  nearer 
the  truth,  but  it  is  an  error  which  leads  a  man  to  a  precipice,  and 
near  unto  the  pit ;  for  if  this  be  so,  then  these  things  will  una- 
voidably follow  :  — 

1.  That  a  Chrbtian  must  see  the  love  of  God  toward  him 
in  Christ,  and  yet  must  not  see  himself  to  be  the  person  lo  whom 
this  love  only  belongs  ;  for  (according  lo  this  very  opinion  itself) 
it  belongs  only  to  a  believer,  and  one  that  hath  the  being  of  grace, 
and  not  to  a  sinner,  as  a  sinner. 

2.  Then  a  Christian  must  not  see  the  love  of  Christ  and  free 
grace  of  God  by  that  proposition  or  testimony  of  the  Spirit  which 
reveals  it,  and  that  is  this,  Tufideltt,  (Thou  beUever,)  called  and 
sanctified,  art  freely  beloved :  and  thus  a  man  must  not  see  his 
estate  good  by  the  light  of  the  Spirit ;  nay,  ihua  a  Christian  must 
receive  ihe  testimony  of  the  Spirit,  which  assures  him  that  he  \a 
loved  without  understanding  the  meaning  of  the  Spirit ;  which  is, 
(not  thou  sinner,  as  such.)  but  thou,  believer,  art  beloved ;  not  thou 
that  hnst  no  grace,  but  thou  that  hast  the  beingof  it,  art  beloved. 

3.  Then  the  first  evidence  is-built  upon  a  mere  weakness,  nay^ 
upon  an  untruth  and  falsehood  ;  for  it  is  a  mere  weakness  not  to 
see  that  wliich  we  should  see,  vii.,  the  being  of  faith  and 
grace  in  the  heart,  in  which  respect  the  promise  is  sealed :  and  if 
any  man,  by  not  seeing  it,  shall  think  and  say  there  is  no  grace, 
no  faith,  no  sanctificailon,  and  now  he  sees  God's  love  to  such  a 
one,  and  he  tliinks  himself  to  be  such  a  one,  when  he  nees 
God's  free  grace,  and  hath  this  first  evidence,  it  is  a  falsehood 
and  an  untruth,  for  it  is  supposed  lo  be  there  in  the  l>eing  of  tt 
all  ihia  while.     Suppose,  therefore,  that  some  Christians,  at  their 

130  TUK   JIORAI.ITT    or  THE    SAUE.ITH. 

first  relnm  ami  conversion  to  Goii,  or  aftfrivtirJ.  liave  frrnce  and 
faith,  but  ^ee  it  not  in  their  nssuraniTe  nt'  (ityl's  love,  (l)ie  cmi- 
neney  of  the  object  and  good  of  il  swallowing  up  llieir  llionglita 
and  hearts  from  atiending  lheniR);]ve.s)  yet  tlie  question  is  ^o 
jur^  ;  ihej  do  not  see,  nay,  pliuuld  not  sac  and  take  notice  of 
the  bein^  of  them  in  themselreii.  le  not  this  a  mei'e  weakness 
and  fttlsuhood  which  is  now  made  the  mystery  of  this  tirsi  evi- 
dence, and  indeed  somewhat  like  Cusanus's  tumma  lapicntia, 
which  he  makes  to  be  this,  viz.,  altingere  illud  quod  est  inaltin- 
(/ibile  I'nallinr/iMiler,  that  a  Christian  must  see  and  touch  God's 
deep  love,  and  yet  neither  see,  nor  touch,  nor  feel  any  change  in 
himself,  or  any  tteing  of  grace,  when  in  truth  it  is  there,  in 
which  respect  also  God's  free  grace  and  love  in  reveoled  ? 

4.  If  this  be  the  llrat  evidence,  then  no  minister,  no,  nor  any 
aposile  of  Christ  Jesus,  can  give  any  first  eridence  of  God's 
love  hy  the  ordinary  dispensation  of  the  gospel;  for  ahhou^h  a 
'minister  may  say.  Thou  art  a  sinner,  therefore  the  Lord  Jesus 
may  save  thee,  yet  he  can  not  say  upon  that  ground  that  there- 
fore the  Lord  Jc^us  will  save  him,' for  then  every  sinner  should 
I  be  saved.  No  minister  can  say  to  any  unbeliever,  Christ  hath 
I  redeemed  thee,  therefore  believe;  or  say  absolutely.  Thy  sins  are 
pardoned ;  for  then  he  should  preach  contrary  to  the  word,  which 
expressly  tells  us,  that  he  that  believes  not  is  already  con- 
demned. No  minister  can  say  Giod  will  work  faith  in  all  you 
llial  are  sinners,  as  halh  been  shown;  but  they  can  say.  Thou, 
believer,  art  pardoned ;  thou  art  sanciilied,  ai"!  reconciled,  etc.  It 
is  therefore  au  evil  speech  of  one  lately  in  print,  who  calls  that 
ft  bastard  assurance,  arising  from  a  lying  spirit,  which  first  pro- 
ceeds from  the  sight  of  any  grace,  and  thence  concludes  they  are 
justified  and  shall  be  save<i.  For  I  would  thus  argue,  that  this 
work  of  grace  (suppose  love  to  the  saints,  hunger  and  thirst  after 
righteousness,  universal  respect  tuall  God's  commandments,  etc.) 
is  either  common  to  hypocrites,  and  unsound,  or  else  it  is  pecu- 
liar to  ihs  elect  and  sincere.  If  the  tirst,  then  it  can  not  lie 
either  first  or  second  evidenco  j  il  can  be  no  evidence  ai  all, 
^ther  without  or  with  seeing,  lirsl.  God's  free  love  to  unners,  as 
einners  ;  if  the  second,  then  either  God's  promise  (made  to  such  ' 
as  are  hungry  and  humble,  and  have  a  work  peculiar  to  Go<)'a 
elect  in  them)  must  be  false,  (which  is  blasphemous  to  imagine,) 
(W  else,  whensoever  it  is  seen,  whether  first  or  kst,  it  must  needs 
be  a  most  blessed,  and  sweet,  and  sure  evidence  ;  fur  when  we  say 
that  such  a  work  of  grace  may  be  a  first  evidence,  we  do  not 
mean  as  if  the  work,  simply  considered  in  itself,  could  give  in  any 
cvidenus,  but  only  as  the  free  promiso  uf  grace  is  made  to  suuli 

THli   MUBALirr    Of   TlIK    a.VliDATir. 

HS  have  siich  a  work  of  grace  :  this  promiae,  wc  say,  lo  suuh  per- 
tou»,  whensoever  iliey  see  this  wort,  gives  in  lull  and  clear 
evidence  oi  their  blessed  eslalc.  And  if  the  word,af  grace  lo  a 
siiini^r,  as  a  sinner,  may  give  in  a  flrst  evidence,  (aa 
pne.)  ihen  much.more  may  it  give  in  evidence  where  iheiti  is 
nut  only  the  word  of  grace,  but  also  the  Spirit  of  grace,  yeu,  the 
work  of  grace,  lo  osaure  the  conscience  ;  and  for  any  to  ultirin 
that  liulh  and  sanctilication  are  ^^oo<l  evidences,  if  jnstilication  be 
(int  evident,  is  but  a  quirk  of  fi-olliy  wit ;  for  it  may  be  as 
safely  affirmed,  on  llie  contrary,  llint  J UKiifi cation  ii  a  gJud  evi- 
dence, if  faith  and  sanctification  be  tirsC  evident,  fur  it  U  not  thc>« 
simply,  but  the  promide  which  i*  our  eviUcnee,  which  U  never  lo 
a  sinner,  as  «ucli.  I  shall  therefore  conclude  these  things  with  v| 
ihuwing  the  troe  grounds  of  effectual  evidence  of  the  love  of  Cbrigt. 
77i«(i«  U9.  The  free  grace  of  God  in  Clirist  (not  works)  19 
■be  only  sure  foundation  of  justifying  faith,  or  upon  which  faith 
i«  builL  (Rom.  iii.  24,  25.  1  Pel.  ii.  4-6.  Matt.  xvi.  18.) 
This  free  grace  therefore  must  first  be  revealed  by  the  Spirit  of 
God  in  the  ministry  of  the  guspel  in  order  unto  faith,  (Ram.  x. 
14,  lot  Kjih.i.  IS.Wwbich  general  revelation  of  free  grace  toaW 
make  tu  be  tbe  H rat  Evidence  on  which  faith  rests,  ami  thus  far  it 
is  irue ;  but  now  this  free  grace  is  revenleil  two  ways  :  — 

1.  In  the  free  offer  of  it  to  he  our  own  by  receiving  it.    (AcU 
z.  13.     GaL  ii.  IS.) 

2.  In  the  free  promise  of  il,  revealing  it  us  our  own  already, 
having  actually  and  effectually  received  it.    (John  i.  12.     Rom.    ' 
V.  1.  2.     1  John  V.  12.) 

The  free  offer  of  grace  (eonini n  i ny  God's  call,  command mcmb 

uid  i>escechingg  to  believe  and  Tie  ruconcilejjj^  jjyca  utrightjo 

I  inssession  of  Ohrist,  or  to  come  and  take,  and  so  posses^ 

-'!'  ' i- J!.!.l.  -Pi--  !!!  11-1     *  ''-"f^-ltomZtt^ 

mutable  pur- 

iBL  ^    ^.        ■     -        ■     -        ■ 

jjlirist  JcsuH  b^  J'aJir.~Tder.  iii.  22.  1  Cor. 
The  free  promW  of~gmcp  (containing  revealed  ii 
poses  and  actual  assurances  of  present  and  future  grace)  gives  u 
right  to  the  JViiiiion  of  Christ,  or  to  enjoy  Christ  as  a  free  gift 
when  it  is  ofier«(l ;  llie  comnumd  and  desire  of  the  donor  lo  re- 
ceive it  to  be  our  own.  gives  right  and  power  to  possess  it;  and 
when  it  is  received,  his  promise  to  us,  assuring  us  that  it  is  and 
■liall  continue  oiir  own.  givesi  us  right  and  privilege  lo  ei^oy  it 

i  make  use  of  it.  Fur  by  two  immutable  things  (ilie  promise 
cunlirmed  by  uath)  we  have  sirong  conflation  who  have  Bed  for 
nrfuge  lo  the  hope  before  us.  (UeU  vi.  17-19.)  The  free  oBn\ 
is  the  first  ipTiunilof  our  failh.  why  we  receive  Christ  10  be  our  I 

n  :  but  llie  fre«iiini»ii»i.'lis  tlie  firil  ground  of  the  assarance  of  I 
faith,  why  we  are  usfluntl  and  persuaded  thai  he  \a  onr  own  1 



^ already;  for  the  jfospel  contains  tliree  things:  1.  The  revela- 
tion of  Christ.  2.  The  offer  of  Chriel.  3.  The  promise  of 
Christ  lo  all  thme  that  i-eceive  lliis  offer.  Hence  faith  (which 
runs  parallel  with  the  gospel,  ihe  proper  object  of  it)  first  sees 

.Christ:  secondly,  receives  Christ;  thirdly,  is  assured  of  the  love 

[of  Christ,  having  received  him. 

I'he  free  offer  of  grace  being  made  lo  (he  soul,  because  it 
poor  and  sinful,  cursed  and  miserable,  and  that  therefore 
would  receive  Christ,  hence  it  is  that  in  this  respect  the  soul 
not  bound  first  to  see  some  good  in  itself  and  so  to  receive  him, 
but  rather  is  bound  (at  first  breathings  of  G!od  upon  ir)  rather  to 
eee  no  good,  i.  e.,  nothing  but  sin  and  perdition,  death  and  dark- 
ness, enmity  and  weakness,  and  therefore  to  receive  him.  (Luke 
xiv.  21.    Rev.  iii.  17,  18.    Gal.  iii.  21.    Rom.  xi.  32.    Hoa.  xiii. 
3.)     Gut  the  promise  of  free  grace  being  actuaily  given  to  the 
H>ul,  (and  not  declared  only  as  it  is  in  the  free  offer,  because  it 
halh  received  Chriat  already,  by  which  he  is  actually  its  own,) 
'  'iS  bound  to  see  some 
I,  and  so  embrace  and 
So  that  although,  in 

hence  it  is,  ihat  in  this  respect  the  & 

good  or  saving  work  of  grace  in  itself  fi 

receive  the  promise  and  Christ  Jesus  in 


)  be  0 

r  believe  in  him,  yet, 
3  must  first  see  some 
2]se  we  have  no  just 
n  challenge  any  promise 
n  Christ,  the  foundation 

selves  wherefore  we  should  receive  him 
in  receiving  him  as  our  own  already,  t 
good,  (the  work  of  free  grace  in  us.)  ( 
ground  thus  lo  receive  him.  No  man  cb 
belonging  to  him  without  having  a  part  ii 

^f  them ;  Ho  man  can  have  Christ  but  by  receiving  of  him,  or 
believing  in  him.  (John  i.  12.)  Hence,  therefore,  they  ihat  say 
lhat  the  first  evidence  of  God's  love  and  free  grace  or  actual  fa- 
vor is  lo  a  sinner,  as  a  sinner,  had  need  consider  what  they  say  ; 
for  is  it  to  a  sinner  as  possessed  with  Christ  and  receiving  of 
him,  or  as  dispossessed  of  Christ,  not  having  of  him,  but  rather 
refusing  and  rejecting  of  him  ?  If  they  say  the  first,  they  llien 
speak  the  truth  ;  but  then  they  raze  down  their  own  pernicious 
principle,  that  Christ  and  God's  love  belongs  to  them,  as  sinners. 
If  they  aUirm  the  latter,  then  they  do  injuriously  destroy  God's 
free  grace  and  the  glory  of  Christ,  who  think  to  possess  promises 
without  possessing  Christ,  or  to  have  promises  of  grace  without 
having  Christ  ilie  foundation  of  them  all.  For,  though  the  com- 
mon love  of  God  (as  (he  bare  offer  of  grace  is)  may  be  matiifest''d 
without  having  Clirist,  yet  special,  aclual  love  can  not  he  actually 
our  own,  without  liaving  and  first  receiving  of  him;  and  if  the 
Spiiit  of  God  convince  the  world  of  sin  (and  consequently  of 
condemnation)  while  they  do  not  believe,  (John  xvi.  9,)  I  wonder 


bow  it  can  then  convince  tbem  of  pardon  of  sin  and  rtconoiliatioii 
"before  they  do  believe?  unless  we  will  ima^ne  it  lo  be  «  lying 
I   ipiril,  which  is  blasphemous.     These  things  not  considered  of, 
'    liave  and  do  occasion  much  error  at  this  day  in  the  point  of  eTt- 
dancing,  and  hath  been  an  inlet  of  deep  delusion,  and  open  gnps 
re  been  made  hereby  lo  the  looee  ways  and  depths  of  Familisu 
I  gross  Arminianism,  and  therefore,  being  well  considered  of, 
<  suflii'ient  to  clear  up  the  ways  of  llioee  failliful  servants  of 
the  Lord,  (who  dare  not  sow  pillows,  nor  cry  peace  to  the  wicked, 
mufh  less  to  sinners,  as  sinners.)  both  from  the  slanderous  impu* 
lation  of  legal  ministrations  after  an  Old  Testament  manner,  ad 
'  niso  of  making  works  the  ground  of  faith,  or  the  causes  of  assur- 
ance of  faith :  Ihe  free  offer  being  ihe  ground  of  the  -one,  n.nd 
llie  free  promise  the  cause  and  ground  of  the  otticr.     Briefly, 
therefore,  — 

1.  The  free  offer  of  grace  is  the  first  evidence  to  a  poor  toGl 
sinner  ihni  he  may  be  beloved. 

2.  The  receiving  of  this  offer  by  fnilli  (relatively  considered  in 
respect  of  Christ's  fpoiless  righteousness)  is  the  first  evidence 
showing  why  he  is  beloved,  or  what  hath  moved  God  actually  lo 
tove  hira. 

3.  The  work  of  sanctilicalion  (which  is  the  fruit  of  our  rccctv- 
I  lag  this  offer)  is  the  first  evidence  showing  that  he  is  beloved. 

I       If,  therefore,  a  condemned  sinner  be  asked  whether  God  nuty 

love  hiro,  and  why  be  thinks  so,  he  may  answer.  Because  Jesus 

'    Christ  is  held  forth  and  offered  to  snch  a  one.     If  he  be  further 

asked,  why  or  what  he  thinks  should  move  God  to  love  him,  he 

Eiay  answer.  Because  I  have  reccivcil  Christ's   righteousness 

offered,  for  which  righteousness'  sake  only  I  know  I  am  beloved, 

I    now  1  have  received  it.     If  he  be  asked,  lastly,  how  be  knows 

L'  nertninly  that  be  is  beloved,  he  may  answer  safely  and  conti- 

|i  4efttly.  Bei'auso  I  am  sanctified ;  I  am  poor  in  spirit,  tbereforu 

.    mine  is  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ;  I  do  mount,  and  therefore  I  shall 

be  comforted ;  I  do  hunger  and  ihirst,  and  therefore  I  shall  be 

Mlisfied.  eCc     We  necil,  in  lime  of  distress  and  temptation,  all 

these  evidences ;  and  therefore  it  is  greatest  wisdom  to  pray  for 

that  Spirit  which  may  clear  ihem  all  up  unto  us,  rather  than  lo 

^  OMiteiia  which  should  be  the  tirsi. 

Atid  thus  we  see  that  the  whole  moral  law  is  our  rule  of  life, 
I  sod  consequently  the  law  of  the  Sabbath,  which  is  a  branch  of 
Ftlus  rule  We  now  proceed  to  show  the  third  branch  of  things 
I  genermlly  and  primarily  moral. 

f      T^emt  120.     Thirdly,  not  only  a  day,  nor  only  a  rest  day,bul 
L'IIK'  rast  day,  or  Sabbath  day,  (which  is  expressed  and  ezproisly 

KU  Tin;  MoUALiTv  oy  hie  saiihatu. 

inlcrprt;led  in  tlie  rommamlmenl  lo  be  tlie  seventh  Jti}',  or  a 
sevL-nih  diiy  of  God's  (lelermming.  aix)  [liert-fore  called  l/,e  Sah- 
bath  of  the  Lord  uiir  Cad.')  is  liere  also  enjoined  und  commanded, 
as  generally  moral.  For  if  a  diiy  be  moral,  wtial  day  mu£t  it  be? 
If  it  be  said,  that  any  day  which  human  wisdom  shall  delcrmine, 
whether  one  day  in  a  hundred  or  a  Ihou^and,  or  one  day  in  many 
yearB ;  if  this  only  bo  generally  moml,  then  the  rule  of  morality 
may  be'brokeo,  because  the  rule  of  equality  may  be  thus  broken 
by  liuraan  determination  ;  for  il  may  be  very  unequal  and  unjust 
to  give  God  one  day  in  a  hundred  or  a  thousand  for  his  worship, 
and  to  assume  so  many  beside  to  ourselves  foi'  our  own  use. 
There  is,  therefore,  something  else  more  particularly,  jct  prinm- 
rily,  moral  in  this  command,  and  that  is  (lie  SalAath  dag,  or  Put'h 
a  day  wherein  there  ajipears  an  equal  division  and  a  fit  propor- 
tion between  lime  for  rest  and  time  for  work,  a  time  for  God  and 
a  time  for  man,  and  that  is  a  seventh  duy  which  God  deiermines. 
A  ill  proportion  of  time  for  God  is  moral,  because  equal;  man 
can  not  determine  nor  set  out  this  proportion ;  God  therefore  only 
can  and  must.  A  day  therefore  ihat  he  shall  determine  is  moral , 
and  if  ho  declares  his  determine  ion  lo  a  seventh,  a  seventh  day 
is  therefore  moral.  Gomarus  ronfesselh  that,  by  ihe  analogy  of 
this  commandment,  not  one  day  in  a  thousand,  or  when  man 
pteaseth,  hut  that  one  day  in  seven  is  moral,  at  least  equal,  fit, 
and  congruous  to  observe  the  same ;  and  if  the  analogy  he  spenkii 
of  arideth  virlute  manda/i  divtjit,  or  by  virtue  of  God's  command- 
ment, the  cause  is  in  eSeet  yielded :  but  if  this  analogy  be  made 
virtutt  tibertah's  himanO',  so  (hat  human  liberty  may  do  well  to 
g^ve  God  one  in  seven,  (because  ihe  Jews  did  so,  and  why  should 
Christians  be  more  scant  ?)  then  I  sec  not  but  human  libia-ly  may 
assume  power  to  itself  lo  imjKise  monthly  and  annual  holy  daya 
as  well,  because  the  Jews  had  their  new  moons  and  yearly  festi- 
vals i  and  by  analogy  thereof,  why  may  not  Christians  who  have 
more  grace  poured  out  u)Kin  them,  and  more  love  shown  unto 
them  under  the  gospel,  hold  some  meet  proportion  with  them 
therain  also,  aa  well  as  in  Sabbaths  ?  But  it  can  never  be  proved 
that  God  hath  left  any  human  wisdom  at  liberty  to  make  holy 
days,  by  the  rule  of  Jewish  projmnions.  Beside,  if  bnman  wi:> 
dam  see  it  meet  and  congruous  to  give  God  at  least  one  day  in 
seven,  this  wisdom  and  reason  is  either  regulated  by  some  law, 
and  iben  it  is  by  virtue  of  the  law  of  God  that  he  should  have 
one  day  in  seven,  or  it  is  not  regulated  by  a  law,  and  then  we  arc 
left  to  a  loose  end  again,  for  rann  to  appoint  wlial  day  be  sees 
I  Biect  in  a  shorter  or  a  longer  lime,  his  own  reason  lieing  his  only 
towi  and  this  neither  Gomarus  nor  llic  words  of  the  command- 



^n[  will  allow,  wlikli  sets  nnd  flxctli  ttic  dny,  trhii:h  we  see  is 
e  day  in  seven,  which  noi  man,  bul  God.  Rliall  deiemltne,  and 
thtri^fore  called  tde  Sabbalh  oftlie  Lord  out  God.  ~~ 

I  Thetit  121.  The  hardest'knot  herein  to  unloose  lies  in  this, 
I  to  know  whether  &  seventh  day  in  ^nerul  which  God  shall  de- 
\  1«rmine,  or  that  pniliculnr  seventh  day  from  the  creation,  be  here 
\  6iily  eomninnded  :  the  first  seems  (in  Mr.  Primrose's  npprehen- 
I  aion)  to  writhe  and  rack  the  words  of  the  comtDondmcnl ;  the 
\  aecniid  (if  granted)  abolishelh  ourChristinn  Sabbaths.  ....^^ 

I  Thrtit  122.  For  clearing  up  of  this  ditliculty,  therefore,  and 
I  leaving  the  dispnto  of  the  change  of  iheSnbb:ilh  to  its  proper  place, 
[  it  may  be  made  good,  that  not  that  seventh  day  from  the  crea- 
f  tion.  so  much  as  a  seventh  day  whicli  God  shall  determine,  (and 
f  tlicrcfore  called  the  seventh  day.)  is  primarily  moral,  and  therc- 
\  fere  enjoined  in  thi^  commandment ;  for  which  end  let  these  tiling 
L  be  considered  and  laid  together,  -" 

.  Because  the  express  words  of  the  commandment  do  not 

\  nn  tlius,  viz.,  "  Remember  to  keep  holy  that  seventh  day,"  but 

rre  generally,  "  the  Sabbath  day ;  "  it  is  in  the  beginning,  and  so 

^  in  the  end  of  this  commandment,  where  it  is  not  suid,  that 

I  iGiod  blessed  that  seventh  day,  bnt  the  Sabbath  day  ;  by  whiuh 

Fcxpression  the  wisdom  of  God.  as  it  points  to  that  particular  scv- 

ftvnth  day,  that  it  should  be  sanctified,  so  it  also  opens  a  door  of 

■liberty  for  change,  if  God  Hball  see  meet,  because  the  substance 

if  the  commandnient  doth  not  only  contain  that  seventh  day,  but 

G  Sabbath  day,  which  may  be  upon  another  seventh,  as  well  as 

Upon  that  which  God  appointed  first ;  and  that  the  substance  of 

WOx  command  is  contained  in  those  tir^t  words,  "  Remember  tlie 

■  Sabbath  day  to  keep  it  holy,"  may  appear  from  the  repetition  of 
^llic  same  commandment.  (Deul.  v.  12,)  where  these  words,  "As 

■  '<bc  Lord  thy  GimI  commanded  thee,"  are  immediately  inserted 
f  beforr  the  rest  of  the  words  of  the  commandment  be  set  down, 

a  eltow  thus  much,  that  therein  is  contained  the  sub^itance  of 
I  the  fuitrtb  eomauind ;  the  words  following  being  added  only  to 
1  preM  to  the  duly,  and  to  point  out  the  particular  day,  which  at  that 
I  tim«  God  would  have  ihcm  to  observe, 

2.  Bomuse  in  the  explication  of  tfiose  words  (the  Sabbath)  it 
f  b  not  cnlird  "  lliut  seventh,"  but  "  the  seventh,"  for  io  the  words 
"  Six  days  »hatl  thou  labor,  but  iht;  seventh  ilay  is  the  Sab- 
1  bftth  of  the  Lord  thy  God."  th«  meaning  of  which  is  thisrouch,  to 
r  vit,  that  man  taking  six  days  to  himitelf  for  labor,  that  he  leave 
Ihe  sevcnih  to  be  the  Lord's.  Now,  unless  any  can  show 
J  Uint  no  other  day  but  that  sevenih  could  be  the  seventh  for  rest, 
L  Aor  no  other  six  days  but  those  six  going  before  thai  aeveuih  could 


be  llie  six  days  for  labor,  ihey  can  never  prove  that  iLia  fourlli 
commandment  haiK  only  a  respect  to  that  particular  seventh,  and 
it  b  no  email  boldness  neceasurilj  lo  limit  where  God  halL  left 
tree  ;  for  we  know  that,  if  God  will,  man  may  take  other  six  days 
for  labor,  and  leave  another  seventh  for  God,  than  those  six 
days  and  thai  seventh  day  only.^ 

3,  The  change  of  the  Sabbslh  undeniably  proves  thus  much, 
(if  it  can  be  proved.)  that  the  morality  of  this  command  did  not 
lie  in  that  particular  day  only ;  for  if  that  only  was  moral,  how 
eould  it  be  changed  ?  and  if  it  did  nol  lie  only  in  that  seventh, 
wherein  then  did  it  more  generally  lie?  Was  it  in  a  day  more 
largely,  or  in  a  seventh  day  more  narrowly  ?  Now,  let  any  indiffer- 
ent conscience  be  herein  Judge,  who  they  be  that  come  nearest 
lo  the  truth,  whether  they  that  fly  so  far  from  the  name  seventh, 
which  is  expressly  mentioned  in  the  commandment,  or  ihey  that 
come  as  near  it  es  may  be ;  whether  they  that  plead  for  a  sev- 
enlii  of  God's  appointing,  or  they  that  plead  for  a  day  (but  God 
knows  when)  of  human  institution.  And  it  is  worth  consid- 
ering why  any  should  be  offended  at  the  placing  of  the  morality 
oflhecomtnHndin  a  seventh,  more  than  at  their  own  placing  of  it 
in  a  day  ;  for  in  urging  the  letter  of  the  commandment  to  that 
particular  seventh,  to  abolish  thereby  the  morality  of  a  seventh 
day,  lUey  do  withal  therein  utterly  abandon  the  morality  of  a  day  ; 
for  if  that  seventh  only  be  enjoined  in  the  letter  of  the  com- 
mandment, and  they  will  thence  infer  that  a  seventh  therefore 
can  not  be  required,  how  can  llicy,  upOQ  (bis  ground,  draw  out 
the  morality  of  a  day  ? 

4.  Because  (we  know)  that  ratio  Ugi»  ut  amnut  Ugit,  \.  e.,  the 
reason  of  a  law  is  the  soul  and  life  of  the  law.  Now,  let  it  be 
considered  why  God  should  appoint  the  sevenih.  rather  ihan  iho 
ninth,  or  tenth,  or  twentieth  day,  for  spiritual  rest ;  and  the  rea- 
son will  appear  not  to  be  God's  absolute  will  merely,  but  because 

.  divine  wisdom  having  just  measures  and  balances  in  its  hand,  in 

I  pra|>ortioning  lime  between  God  and  man,  it  saw  a  seventh  part 

of  lime  (rather  than  a  tenth  or  twentieth)  lo  be  most  equal  for 

himself  to  lake,  and  tor  man  to  give  :  and  thus  much  the  words 

of  the  commandment  imply,  viz.,  that  it  is  most  equal  if  man 

hath  six,  that  God  should  have  the  seventh :  now,  if  this  be  the 

reason  of  the  law,  this  must  needs  be  the  soul  and  substance  of 

I    the  morality  of  the  law.  viz.,  that  a  seventh  day  be  given  lo  God, 

'^tnan  having  six,  and  therefore  it  consists  not  in  thatseventli  day 

only ;  tor  the  primary  reason  why  God  appointed  this  or  that 

seventh  was  not  because   it  was  that  seventh,  but  because  a 

sevenih  was  now  equal  in  the  eye  of  God  for  God  to  take  to 

f  HE  KOUALirr   ( 


nseir.  n 

ri  lia 

i.togeilier  for  liimst-lf;  iu\A  because  n 

5  Ihe  full  and  fitlcst  proporlicin  of  six  days 

-ijlli  1 

s  ihp  finest  pro- 

portion of  time  for  God,  he^l^e  this  or  thnt  iii<liviUiial  and  )iur- 

ticular  seventh  in  the  second  place  fall  out  to  he  moral,  bei'nuse 

they  contain  the  most  equal  and  lillesi  proportion  of  a  seventh 

^  day  in  tht^ni ;  there  was  also  another  reueon  why  that  ««venlh 

1  sanctified,   viz.,  God'a  rest  in  it;   but  this  reason  is    not 

Hmary,  na  hath  been  said,  and  of  which  now  we  tipeak. 

',  Because,  if  no  other  commandment  be  in  the  decalo^i'e 

)  comprehensive,  and  looking  many  ways  at  unce,  why 

ro  then  pinion  and  gird  up  this  only  lo  the  narrow  cum- 

«  of  that  seventh  day  only  ? 

6,  Because  our  adversaries  in  this  jtoint  are  forced  somelimcB 
'  lo  acknowledge  thin  morality  of  a  seventh  with  us :  we  have  hearil 
the  judgment  of  Gomsrus  hi-rein,  (Thesis  44,)  nnd  M.  Priin- 
nK«,  wlio  speaks  with  most  weight  and  spirit  in  this  controversy, 
profe«^elh  phkinly,  that  if  God  give  us  «ix  days  for  our  own  af- 
fairs, there  is  then  good  rca.4on  to  consecrate  a  ^eventh  lo  his 
service,  and  that  in  this  rcai^on  there  is  manilest  jusliiMS  and 
equity,  which  abideth  forever,  to  dedicate  to  God  precisely  a 
seventh  day  after  we  have  bestowed  sin  days  upon  ourst:lves.     It 
ran  not  be  denied  (soilh  he)  but  that  it  is  most  jusL   Now,  if  it  he 
by  his  coo^siun,  1,  just,  *2,  most  just,  H,  manifestly  jnal,  4.  per- 
petually Just.  10  give  God  precisely  one  day  in  seven,  the  ciiu^c  . 
is  Ihen  yielded:  ihe  only  evatuon  ho  mitkcs  is  this,  v it.,  that 
^ylhough  it  be  most  just  lo  givt-  God  one  day  in  seven,  yet  it  is 
^^fat  more  just  ihon  to  ptvc  God  one  in  six,  or  five,  or  four,  thrru  - 
Hpting  mi  natural  justice  in  the  number  of  seven  mort-  than  in 
B^lw  nnrobcr  of  six  or  four :  but  the  answer  is  easy,  that  if  man 
may  give  unio  God  superaiitiously  loo  niany,  or  profanely  loo  few, 
and  if  iho  appointment  of  God  halh  declared  ilsclf  for  a  seventh, 
and  that  the  giving  of  llii.'  seventh  be  most  just  and  Brjiial,  then 
let   it   be  considered  whether  it  be   not   most  salisliurlory  l»  a 
scrupling  conscience  lo  allow  Goil  a  scvcnih  day  which  hi:  halh 
appuinivd.  which  is  confessed  lo  bo  most  just  and  perpeinully 
«i)iial,  and  consequently  moral;  and  if  there  be  a  moral  and 
^yorpctuiU  equity  to  give  God  one  day  in  seven,  then  it  is  no 
HlMtller  wlicther  tlicre  be  any  more   natural   equity  ibcrein   ihun 
Hb  one  in  livti  or  six.     Thi:  dUputers  tif  this  world  may  pic-use 
^^hein««lvea  wiih  such  speculations  and  shifts,  hut  the  wisdom  of 
God,  which  hall)  already  ap|K)inied  one  diiy  in  seven  rather  than 
ill  tix  or  ten.  should  bi-  adored  herein,  by  humble  minds,  in  cut- 
ting out  this  proportion  of  time,  with  far  greater  equity  thus 
man  can  now  readily  see. 
U.  12*  ^ 


7.  Because  deep  corruplioti  is  (lie  groiin'l  of  this  opinion,  the 
plucking  up  of  Gud'd  bounds  and  landiimrks  of  a  seventh  is  to 
put  the  etakes  into  the  church's  hands,  to  set  them  wticre  she 
pleaseth;  or  if  she  set  them  at  e  seventh,  where  God  would  have 
them,  yet  that  this  may  be  submitted  to,  not  because  God  pleas- 
eth,  but  because  the  church  so  pleaseth  ;  not  because  of  God's 
will  and  determination,  but  because  of  the  church's  will  and  de- 
termination, that  so,  it  being  once  granted  lliat  the  church  hath 
liberty  to  determine  of  sueh  a  day.  she  may  not  be  denied  liberty 
of  making  any  other  holidays,  or  holy  things  in  the  worship  and 
service  of  God  ;  and  tliat  this  is  the  main  scope  and  root  of  this 
opinion,  is  palpably  evident  from  most  of  the  writings  of  our 
English  adversaries  iu  this  conti'over^y.  ' 

Hitsit  123.  A  seventh  day,  therefore, is  primarily  moral;  yet 
(us  was  formerly  said.  Thesis  46)  there  is  something  else  in  thb 
commandment  which  is  secondarily  moral,  viK.,  this  or  that  par- 
ticular seventh  day.  1  will  not  say  that  it  is  accidentally  moral, 
(as  some  do,)  Jiut  rather  secondarily,  and  eonsequeiitly  moral. 
For  it  is  not  moral  firstly,  because  it  is  this  particular  seventh, 
but  because  it  has  a  seventh  part  of  lime,  divinely  proportioned 
and  appointed  for  rest,  falling  into  ii,  and  of  which  it  partici|>ates. 
To  give  alms  to  the  needy  is  a  moral  duty,  and  primurlly  moral ; 
but  to  give  this  or  that  quantity  may  be  moral  also;  but  it  is 
secondarily  moral,  because  it  flows  ex  emuequenti,  only  from  thu 
first;  for  if  we  are  to  give  alms  according  to  ^ur  ability  and 
others'  necessity,  then  this  or  that  particular  quantity  thus  suiting 
their  necessity  must  be  given,  which  is  also  a  moml  duty  ;  so  it 
u  in  this  point  of  the  Sabbath.^ 

T^eti*  124.  Hence  it  follows  that  litis  commandment  enjoins 
two  things  :  1.  More  generally,  a  seventh.  2.  More  particu- 
krly,  this  or  that  seventh,  and  in  special  that  seventh  from  the 
creation,  this  or  that  seventh  are  to  be  kept  holy  because  of  a 
seventh  part  of  time  appointed  falling  into  them.  A  seventh 
day  also  is  to  be  kept  holy  by  virtue  of  the  commandment ;  yet 
not  in  general,  but  with  special  eye  and  respect  to  that  pariic- 
nlar  seventh,  wherein  this  general  is  involved  and  preserved. 
That  seventh  from  the  creation  is  commanded,  because  of  a 
seventh  falling  into  it;  and  a  seventh  also  is  commanded,  yet 
with  a  special  eye  to  that  seventh  wherein  it  is  involved.  And 
tlierefore  it  is  a  vain  objection  to  atfirm,  that  if  a  seventh  be 
commanded,  that  then  no  particular  seventh  is ;  or  if  any  partic- 
ular seventh  be  so,  that  then  a  seventh  is  not ;  for  the  command- 
ment, we  see,  hath  respect  to  both  ;  for  wlat  is  there  more  fre- 
qnent  in  Scripture  than  tor  general  duties  to  be  wrapped  tip  and 



Kt  forth  in  some  particular  things,  instances,  and  examples,  and 
consequently  boih  commnnded  together  ?  And  after  narrow 
search  into  this  I'ommandment,  we  shall  find  both  the  general 
and  particular  seventh,  not  only  inferring  one  the  other,  but  both 
of  thein  in  a  manner  expressly  mentioned. 

Tlietit  125.  When  those  that  plead  for  the  morality  of  the 
fourth  uoutmuad,  in  respect  of  a  seventh  day,  would  prove  it  to 
be  moral,  because  it  is  part  of  the  decalogue  and  set  in  the 
heart  of  it,  with  a  special  note  of  remeiubrance  affixed  to  it,  etc., 
Mr.  Ironside  and  others  do  usually  dash  all  such  reasonings  out 
of  countenance,  with  this  answer,  viz.,  that  by  this  argument. 
That  particular  seventh  from  the  creation  is  moral,  which  we 
see  is  changed  ;  for  (say  they)  that  also  is  set  in  the  heart  of  Uie 
decalogue,  with  a  special  note  of  remembrance  also.  But  the 
reply  from  what  hath  been  said  is  easy,  viz^  that  that  also  ia 
indeed  moral,  only  it  is  secondarily  moral,  not  primarily ;  and 
therefore  (us  we  have  shown)  was  mutable  and  changeable,  the 
primary  morality  in  a  seventh  immutably  remaining ;  the  moral 
duty  of  observing  a  seventh  day  is  not  chiuiged,  but  only  the 
day.  If  Mr.  Primrose  could  prove  thai  there  is  nothing  else 
commanded  in  this  fourth  command,  but  only  that  particular 
seventh  from  the  creation,  he  had  then  enough  to  show  that  (this 
day  being  justly  changed)  the  commandment  is  not  moral  or  per- 
petual ;  but  out  of  this  particular  seventh  which  is  now  changed, 
himsell'  acknowledgeth  that  out  of  it  may  be  gathered  the  moral- 
ity of  a  day ;  and  why  not  of  the  seventh  day  also,  as  well  as  of  a 
day?  He  saitb  that  it  is  a  bold  assertion  lo  say  that  this  genus 
of  a  seventh  is  herein  commanded.  But  why  is  it  not  as  bold  to 
affirm  the  same  of  a  day  ?  For  out  of  that  par^culor  seventh 
whence  he  would  raise  the  genus  of  a  day,  we  may  as  easily,  and 
far  more  ratiDnally,  collect  the  genus  of  a  seventh  day. 

Thrti*  12tl.  Nur  will  it  follow  that  because  a  seventh  is 
ntoml.  thai  thereforu  tiny  one  of  the  seven  days  in  a  week  may 
be  madi'  a  Christian  Sabbath.  For,  1.  We  do  not  say  that  it  is 
any  seventh,  but  a  seventh  determined  and  appomteil  of  God  for 
holy  rest,  which  is  herein  commanded.  2.  The  Lord  hath  in  wis* 
dum  appointed  such  a  seventh  as  that  man  may  have  six  whole 
days  together  to  labor  in:  and  hence  it  follows  that  divine  detenni- 
nalion,  without  crossing  that  wisdom,  could  not  possibly  full  upon 
any  other  days  in  the  cycle  of  seven,  but  either  upon  the  last 
of  seven,  which  was  the  Jewish,  or  the  first  of  seven,  which  now 
is  (as  shall  be  sliown)  tlie  Christian  Sabbath.  3.  As  God  hath 
appointed  one  day  in  seven  for  man's  rest,  so  in  his  wisdom  he 
nlen  it  «  thai  U  iball  be  also  a  day  of  God's  rest,  and  tlta| 



140  THE   llonALITT   OF   TUB   SABBATH. 

is  not  to  be  found  in  any  d&j  of  the  vreeii  but  eitbcr  in  tlie  last 
of  seven,  wherein  the  Father  resieH,  or  in  the  first  of  seven, 
wherein  the  Sou  rested  from  his  work  bIso.^ 

3K«n(  127.  It  ia  true  thnt  the  Siibbuth  dajniid  Umt  seventh 
day  from  the  creation  lire  indifferently  taken,  sometimes  the  one 
for  the  other,  the  one  being  the  exegesis,  or  (lie  explication  of 
the  other,  as  Gun.  ii.  2,  3,  Exod.  xvi.  29,  and  elsewhere;  but 
that  it  should  be  only  so  understood  in  this  eoinniandment, 
Gndat  Judeus Apella,  turn  ego,  us  be  said  in  another  case.  I  see 
no  convicCiug  ai'gunient  to  clip  ihe  winga  of  the  Scrijiture  so 
ehort,  and  lo  make  the  Snbbnth  day  and  that  seventh  day  of 
equal  dimensions ;  aUbough  it  can  not  be  denied  but  thut  in 
some  sense  the  Siibbath  day  is  exegelical  of  the  seventh  day, 
because  the  commandment  haih  a  special  eye  to  that  seventh 
from  the  creation,  which  is  secondarily  moral,  yet  not  exclud- 
ing that  which  is  more  generally  contained  in  that  parlieular, 
and  consequently  commanded,  viz.,  a  seventh  day,  or  the  Sab- 
bath day. 

Thttii  128.  Mr.  Primrose  would  prove  the  exegesis,  that 
by  the  Sabbath  day  is  meant  lliut  seventh  day  only  from  the 
creation,  because  God  actually  blessed  and  sanctified  thnt  Sab- 
bath day,  because  God  can  not  actually  bless  a  seventh,  being  an 
unlimited,  indefinite,  and  uncertain,  indeterniined  time.  The  time 
(saith  he)  only  wherein  he  resied,  lie  only  aclually  blessed,  whicli 
waa  not  in  a  seventh  day  indelennined,  but  in  that  delermined 
Mvenlh  day.  But  all  this  may  be  readily  acknowledged,  and 
yet  the  truth  remain  Arm ;  for  that  parlieular  seventh  being 
secondarily  moral,  hence,  as  it  was  expressly  commanded,  so  it  was 
actually  and  particularly  blessed :  but  ns  in  this  seventh  a  general 
of  a  seventh  is  included,  so  a  seventh  is  also  generally  blessed 
and  sanctified.  Otherwise  how  will  Mr.  Primrose  maintain  the 
morality  of  a  day  of  worship  out  of  this  commandment?  For 
the  same  objection  may  be  made  against  a  duy  which  himself  ac- 
knowledgeth.  as  against  a  seventh  day  which  we  maintain  ;  for  it 
may  he  said,  that  that  day  is  here  only  moral,  wherein  God  aciu- 
atly  rested,  but  he  did  not  rust  in  a  day  indefinitely,  and  there- 
fore a  day  is  not  moral :  let  him  unloose  this  knot,  and  his  answer 
in  defense  of  the  monililyof  aday  will  helphim  tosee  the  momliiy 
"Of  a  Bovenih  also.  Thai  particular  day,  indeed,  wherein  iioA 
actually  and  particularly  rested,  he  particularly  blesseil;  but  there 
was  a  seventh  day  also  more  general,  which  he  generHlly  blessvd 
also-  He  generally  blessed  the  Siibbaih  daj-,  he  panicularly 
blessed  that  -Sabbmh  day,  and  in  blessing  of  that  he  did  virtually 
mid  by  analogy  bless  our  particular  Christian  Sabbath  also,  which 



\r-    THE    SABBATH, 

wfta  to  come.  As  JfoMS,  in  h'xa  nclual  blessing  of  the  tribe  of 
Levi,  (D«ut.  xxxiii.  7, 10.)  he  did  virtually  and  by  analogy  blesa 
all  the  minislers  of  ihe  goiip«l  not  then  in  being.  And  look,  as 
when  God  coiamanded  them  to  keep  holy  the  Sttbbath  in  ceremo- 
nial duties,  he  did  therein  virtually  command  us  lo  keep  it*lioly 
in  evangelical  duties  ;  so  when  be  commanded  tbem  to  obsei've 
that  day,  bet^^ause  it  was  actually  appointed,  and  sanclified,  and 
blessed  of  God,  he  commanded  us  virtually  and  analogically 
therein  to  observe  our  seventh  day  also,  if  ever  he  should  actually 
appoint  and  bless  this  other. 

T/tetit  lis.  The  distribution  of  equity  and  justice  conaiaU 
not  always  in  puHcIo  indtvitilnli,  i.  e.,  in  an  indivisible  point  and 
a  set  measure  ;  so  as  that  if  more  or  less  be  done  or  given  in 
way  of  justice,  that  then  the  rule  of  justice  is  thereby  brokeu  ; 
«s.  gr,  it  ia  just  to  give  alms  and  pay  tribute ;  yet  not  so  just  aa 
that  if  iDea  give  more  or  less,  that  then  they  break  a  rule  of 
justice ;  so  it  is  in  this  point  of  the  Sabbath  ;  a  seventh  part  of 
lime  it  moral,  because  it  is  jnst  and  equal  for  all  men  to  give 
unto  God,  who  have  sii  for  one  given  tliem  to  serve  their  own 
turn,  and  do  their  own  work  in ;  yet  it  is  not  so  juet  but  that  if 
God  bad  required  the  tribute  of  a  third  or  fourtL  part  of  our 
time,  but  it  might  have  been  just  also  (o  have  given  him  one  day 
in  three,  or  two,  or  four ;  for  in  ihia  case  positive  determination 
dolb  not  so  much  make  as  declare  only  that  which  is  moraL 
And  therefore,  if  Mr.  Primrose  thinks  that  a  seventh  part  of  time 
is  not  moral,  because  it  is  as  equal  and  just  to  dedicate  more  time 
to  God,  and  that  a  third  or  fourth  day  is  as  equal  as  a  seventh, 
it  is  doubtless  an  ungrounded  assertion  ;  for  so  he  afllrms,  that 
although  il  be  most  just  to  give  God  one  day  in  seven,  yet  no 
mure  just  than  lu  dedicate  lo  him  one  day  in  three  or  six.  And 
suppose  it  be  so,  yel  this  doth  not  prove  that  a  seventh  day  ia 
not  moral,  because  it  is  as  equal  to  give  six  as  seven,  no  more 
than  ihHt  it  is  no  monil  duty  lo  give  an  alms,  because  il  may  bo 
as  equal  to  give  twenty  pence  as  thirty  pence  txi  a  man  in  want. 
If,  furthermore,  he  think  that  it  is  as  equal  and  just  to  give  God 
more  days  for  his  service,  as  one  in  seven,  out  of  human  wisdom, 
and  by  bunutn  consecration,  not  divine  dedication,  then  it  may 
be  doubted  whether  one  day  in  Iwo,  or  three,  or  six,  is  as  equal 
as  one  day  in  seven  ;  for  as  human  wisdom,  if  lef\  to  itself,  may 
readily  pve  too  few,  so  it  may  superstitiously  give  too  many,  (us 
hath  been  said.)  But  if  four,  or  three,  or  six  be  alike  equal 
in  themselves  to  give  lo  God,  as  one  in  seven,  then  if  ho  thinks 
il  a  moral  duty  lo  observe  any  such  day  in  case  il  should  be  im- 
posed and  consecrated  by  human  determination,  I  hope  he  will 



not  be  oHendeil  iit  us  if  we  lliuik  it  a  moral  iluty  nl^o  to  ofi- 
B«'ve  a  seventh  Jny,  wbii'h  we  are  certain  dirine  wisdom  hiilh 
judged  most  eijual,  and  which  is  imposed  on  us  by  Jtvinc  deterioi- 
nalion ;  we  may  be  uiieerltiiii  ivheilier  tlie  one  is  as  eqiiul,  as  we 
art  eei'tain  that  &  seventh  dny  is, 

T/iesit  130.  Actions  of  worsliip  can  no  moi'p  be  imagined  lo 
be  do]io  without  some  lime,  tlian  a  body  be  wittioul  Eonie  plHire ; 
and  ihereforo  in  ihe  three  first  eommandmenta,  where  Goil's  wor- 
ship is  enjoined,  some  time  logetlier  with  it  is  nece.searily  com- 
manded ;  if,  thensfore,  any  time  for  worship  be  required  in  llie 
fourlU  command,  (which  none  can  deny,)  it  must  not  l*e  aunh  n 
time  as  ie  connatural,  and  which  is  necexsnrily  tied  to  llie  action ; 
but  it  must  be  some  solemn  and  special  time,  which  depends  upon 
some  special  determination,  not  which  nature,  but  wliicli  counsel, 
determines.  Dc I ermi nation,  therefore,  by  conn^l  of  that  lime 
which  is  required  in  ibis  command,  dolh  not  alwli^h  the  morality 
of  il,  but  rather  declares  and  establisheth  it.  God,  therefore,  wlio 
is  Lord  of  time,  may  justly  cbuUenge  the  determination  of  this 
Ijine  into  liis  own  luind.  und  not  infringe  the  morality  of  Ibis  com- 
mand, considering  also  ibat  be  ia  more  able  and  fit  limn  men  or 
angels  lo  see,  and  so  cut  out  Ihe  most  equnl  proportion  of  time 
between  man  and  himself.  God  tlierefore  hatb  sei|uegicred  a  m-v- 
enih  pftrt  of  time  to  be  sanctilied,  rather  than  a  litth,  a  fourth,  or 
a  ninth,  not  simply  because  it  was  this  seventh,  or  a  sevenlli,  but 
because,  in  his  wise  determination  thereof,  he  knew  it  to  be  ibo 

most  just  and  equal  di 
and  therefore  I  know  nc 
seen  one  day  in  three,  o 
tion  of  time  as  one  day 
free  to  man  to  lake  and 
(the  Spirit  of  God  not 

four,  c 

n  of  time  between  man  and  bimsirif ; 
ingruily  to  afRnn,  that  if  God  hiid 
ir  nine,  lo  be  as  equal  a  propor- 
1.  that  he  would  then  bave  left  it 
either  the  one  or  the  olbcr, 
9ually  restraining  where  there  is  a  lib- 
erty ;)  and  on  the  other  side,  if  be  had  seen  a  third,  or  fifth,  or 
ninth,  or  twunlieth  part  of  lime  more  equul  than  a  sevemli,  ho 
would  have  fixed  the  bounds  of  labor  and  rest  out  of  a  seventh ; 
but  Laving  now  fixed  them  lo  a  seventh,  a  sevenih  day  is  therefore 
moral,  rather  than  a  fourth,  or  sixth,  or  nintli  day,  beeitngc  it  is 
the  most  equal  and  fittest  proportion  of  time  (all  things  consid- 
ered) between  God  and  man;  ihti  appointment  therefore  of  r 
seventh,  ntther  thim  a  sixth  or  fburtli,  is  not  an  act  of  God's 
mSE^wULiinl/.  (as  our  advei'Siiries  affirm,  and  therefore  they 
thinirit5nt-i«2!ji!')  '^'"  ■'  *"*  ^"^  '^  *"  '*"^  "'  ''■*  "isdom  also, 
according  lo  a  moral  rule  of  justice,  viz..  Id  give  unto  God  that 
which  b  roost  fit,  most  just,  and  most  equal ;  and  therefore, 
although  there  is  no^ftturajjuslice  (as  Mr.  Primrose  calls  it)  in 


_  I  seventh,  Simp] J  wiil  abalniclly  considered,  rntlier  than  in  a 
rixth  or  tenlh,  yet  if  tlie  most  equal  proportion  of  time  for  God 
be  lotted  out  in  a  seventh,  there  is  then  eomelhing  natural  and 
niorul  in  it  rather  than  in  any  other  partition  of  time,  vie.,  to 
give  God  ihni  proportion  of  time  which  h  most  just  and  most 
C(]ual ;  and  in  this  respect  a  seventh  part  of  time  is  commanded, ij 
becauiie  it  is  goo<l,  (according  to  the  deecripiion  of  a  moral  law,)V 
•ad  not  only  goodbecansi-  it  ia  HimmanHpil.  1^ 

Thttit  131.  '  it  ia  true  that  in  private  duties  of  worship,  aa 
to  reitd  (he  Scriptun^,  meditate,  pray,  etc.,  the  time  for  these 
and  the  like  duties  is  tell  to  the  will  and  determination  of  man, 
according  to  general  rules  of  conveniencj  and  sea&onableness  eel 
down  in  the  word ;  tnno's  will  (in  this  sense)  is  the  measure  of  ' 
such  limes  of  worship  ;  but  there  is  not  tlie  like  reason  here,  in 
det«nnining  time  for  a  Sabbath,  as  if  that  should  be  left  to  man's 
liheriy  al^o.  because  those  private  duties  are  to  be  done  in  that 
time  which  is  necessarily  annexed  to  the  duties  themselves, 
which  time  is  therefore  there  commanded,  where  and  when  the 
duly  is  commanded  ;  but  the  lime  for  a  Sabbath  is  not  such  a  time 
ma  naturally  will  and  most  attend  the  action,  but  it  is  such  a  time 
■s  cflunMl  (not  nature)  sees  most  meet,  and  especially  that  coun- 
tl  which  is  most  able  lo  moke  the  most  equal  proportions  of  lime, 
lilfch  we  know  is  not  in  the  liberty  or  ability  of  men  or  angels. 
It  of  God  himself;  for  do  but  once  imagine  a  time  requited 
It  of  the  limits  of  what  naturally  attends  the  action,  and  it  will 
a  found  necessarily  to  be  a  lime  determined  by  counsel ;  and 
Wrefurc  our  adversaries  should  not  think  it  as  free  for  man  lo 
Mnge  the  Sabbath  seasons  from  the  seventh  to  the  Stlh,  or 
tenih  day,  etc.  as  to  alter  and  pick  our  times  for  pri* 

'  7K*m  IS'i.  There  is  a  double  reason  of  proposing  God's 
auunple  in  the  fburih  command,  as  is  evident  from  the  com- 
"  mandmeni  itself :  thefirct  waste  persuade,  the  second  was  to  direct. 
I.  To  persuade  man  so  lo  labor  sin  days  together,  as  to  give  the 
seventh,  or  a  seventh  appointed  for  holy  rest,  unto  God ;  for  so 
■he  example  speaks  —  God  labored  six  days,  and  rested  the  sev- 
enth ;  therefore  do  ye  the  like.  2.  To  direct  the  people  of  God 
to  that  particular  seventh,  which,  for  that  time  when  the  law  was 
given,  God  would  have  them  then  to  ol>serve,  and  that  was  that 
seventh  which  did  succeed  the  sii  days'  labor:  and  therefore  for 

Pio  make  God's  example  of  rest  on  that  seventh  day  an  argu- 
t  (hat  God  commanded  the  observation  of  that  seventh  day 
.  is  a  groundless  assertion ;  for  (here  was  something  more  gen- 
y  aimed  at  by  setting  forili  this  example,  viE.,to  persuade  m^i 



hereby  to  labor  ei\  dajs,  and  give  God  the  seventh,  wbicb  be 
ehould  appoint,  as  well  as  to  direct  to  that  particular  daj,  which 
for  that  time  (it  is  granted)  it  also  poinicd  utilo ;  and  therefore  let 
the  words  in  the  commandment  be  observed,  and  we  shall  Snd 
man's  duty,  1,  more  generally  set  down,  viz^  to  labor  six  days, 
and  dedicate  the  seventh  unio  God  ;  and  then  followii  God's  per- 
suasion  hereunto  from  bis  owi)  example,  who  when  he  bad  a  world 
to  make,  and  work  to  do,  he  did  labor  six  daj's  together,  and 
rested  the  seventh  ;  and  thus  a  man  is  boand  to  do  still :  but  it 
doth  not  follow  that  he  must  rest  that  particular  seventh  only, 
on  wbicb  God  then  rested ;  or  that  that  seventh  (though  we 
grant  it  was  pointed  unto)  was  only  aimed  at  in  this  example  : 
the  binding  power  of  all  examples  whatsoever  (and  therefore  of 
this)  being  ad  speciem  aetua,  (as  they  call  it,)  to  that  kind  of  act, 
and  not  to  the  individuian  actimiii  only,  or  to  every  particular  ac- 
eidental  circumstance  therein ;  if,  indeed,  man  was  to  labor  six 
days  in  memorial  only  of  the  six  days  of  creation,  and  to  rest  a 
■eventh  day  in  memorial  only  of  God's  rest  and  cessation  from 
creation,  it  might  then  carry  a  fair  face,  as  if  this  example 
pointed  at  the  observation  of  that  particular  seventh  only ; 
but  look,  as  our  six  days'  labor  is  appointed  for  other  and  higher 
ends  than  to  remember  the  six  days'  work  of  God,  it  being  u 
moral  duty  to  attend  our  callings  therein,  so  the  seventh  day 
of  rest  is  appointed  for  higher  and  larger  ends  (as  Didoclavius 
observes)  than  only  to  remember  that  notable  rest  of  God  from 
all  bis  works,  it  being  a  moral  duty  to  rest  the  seventh  day  in  all 

Theiis  133.  It  wa&  but  accidental,  and  not  of  the  essence  of 
the  Sabbath  day,  that  that  particular  seventh  from  the  creation 
should  be  the  Sabbath  ;  for  the  seventh  day  Sabbath  being  to  be 
man's  rest  day,  it  was  therefore  suitable  to  God's  wisdom  to  give 
man  an  example  of  rest  from  himself,  to  encourage  him  there- 
unto, (for  we  know  how  strongly  examples  persuaide  :)  now,  rest 
being  a  cessation  from  labor,  it  therefore  supposes  labor  to  go 
before  ;  hence  God  could  not  appoint  the  first  day  of  the  crea- 
tion to  be  the  Sabbath,  because  he  did  then  but  begin  his  labor ; 
nor  could  he  take  any  the  other  days,  because  in  them  he  had  not 
finished  his  work,  nor  rested  from  his  labor  ;  therefore  God's  rest 
fell  out  upon  the  last  of  seven  succeeding  six  of  labor  before  ;  so 
^  that  if  there  could  have  been  any  other  day  as  fit  then  for  exem- 
plary rest  as  this,  and  rs  afterward  it  fell  out  in  the  finishing  of 
the  work  of  redemption,  it  might  have  been  as  well  upon  such  a 
day  as  this  ;  but  it  was  not  then  so :  and  benc«  the  r^sl  day  fell, 
M  it  were,  accidentally  upon  this :  and  hence  it  is  that  God's 


example  of  rest  on  tliat  particular  day  doih  not  necessarily  bind 
US  to  observe  ilie  same  scventli  day ;  moral  examples  not  always 
binding  in  iheir  accidentals,  (as  the  cafe  is  here,)  although  it  be 
true  that  in  tlieir  csseatials  tbey  always  do. 

Thetit  13-1.  There  is  no  strength  in  that  reason,  [hnt  because 
one  day  in  seven  is  to  be  consecrated  unto  God,  that  therefore 
one  year  in  ^even  is  to  be  so  also,  as  of  old  it  was  among  the 
Jews;  for  beside  what  hath  been  said  formerly,  viz.,  that  one 
year  in  seven  was  merely  ceremonial,  one  day  in  seven  is  not  so, 
(saith  Wallffius.)  but  moral;  God  gave  no  example  (whose  ex- 
ample is  only  in  moral  things)  of  resting  one  year  in  seven,  but 
lie  did  of  resting  out  day  in  seven.  I  say,  beside  all  this,  it  is 
observable  what  Junius  nolc«<  herein.  The  Lonl  (saitb  he)  chal- 
lcug«lL  one  day  in  seven  jure  creatxoaii,  by  right  of  creation ; 
■nd  hence  requires  it  of  «U  men  created  :  but  he  challenged  one  . 

Snr  in  «cven  jure  pemliari*  posstssionis,  i.  c.,  by  right  of  pecu- 
r  possession,  the  land  of  Canaan  being  the  Lord's  land  in  « 
peculiar  maTincr,  even  a  type  of  heaven,  which  every  other  coun- 
try  is  not ;  and  therefore  there  is  no  reason  lliat  all  men  should 
give  God  one  seventh  year,  as  they  are  to  give  him  one  seventh 
duy.  By  the  observation  of  one  day  in  seven,  (sailb  he.)  men 
profess  themselves  to  be  the  Lord's,  and  to  belong  unto  him,  who 
created  and  made  them ;  and  tins  profession  all  men  are  bound 
nnioi  but  by  observation  of  one  year  in  seven,  ibey  professed 
thereby  that  their  country  was  the  Lord's,  and  themselves  the 
Lord's  tenants  therein,  which  alt  counlfies  (not  being  types  of 
heaven)  can  not  nor  ouglil  to  do;  and  therefore  there  is  not  thfl 
like  reason  urged  to  the  observation  of  a  seventh  year  as  of  a 
sc\~enth  day. 

TJittlt  135,  Look  therefore  as  it  is  in  the  second  command- 
ment, although  the  particular  instituted  worship  is  changed  under 
the  gospel  from  wlml  it  was  under  the  law,  yet  the  general  duty 
rei|uire(l  therein  of  observing  God's  own  instituted  worship  id 
tnorul  and  unchangeable.  So  it  is  in  the  fourth  commandment, 
where  though  tlie  [tarliculnr  day  be  changed,  yet  the  duty  remains 
moral  and  unchangeable  in  observing  a  seventh  day;  there  is 
therefore  no  reason  to  imagine  that  (he  general  duty  contained 
in  this  precept  'n  not  moral,  because  the  observance  of  the  par- 
ticular day  is  mutable  ;  and  yet  tliis  is  the  fairest  color,  but  the 
pirongcsl  refuge  of  lies,  which  their  cause  hath  who  hold  a  scventb 
day  to  be  merely  eeremouial. 

TlittU  ISli.     If  it  lie  a  moral  duly  to  observe  one  day  tn 

'en,  then  the  observation  of  such  a  day  no  more  infringeth 

Cliriatian  liheriy  than  obedience  to  any  other  moral   law,  oii2_ 

VOL.  til.  13 






part  of  our  Cbriatiao  liberty  consisting  in  our  conforniily  lo  it,  as 
our  bondage  con.sists  in  being  left  to  sin  against  it ;  and  tbcrefore 
lliiit  argument  against  the  moralily  of  one  day  in  sei'en  is  very 
feelilc,  as  if  Christian  liber^  waa  hereby  infringed. 

Thexii  137.  It  was  meet  that  God  should  have  special  ser- 
vice from  nan,  and  therefore  meet  for  himself  to  appoint  a  special 
time  for  it;  nhich  time,  tliough  it  be  a  circumstance,  yet  it  is 
such  a  circumBtance  as  hatli  a  special  influence  into  any  business, 
not  only  human,  but  also  divine ;  and  therefore  if  it  be  naturally, 
it  may  be  aUo  ethically  and  morally  good,  contributing  much  also 
to  what  is  morally  good ;  and  therefore  tlie  delerminalion  of  such 
a  lime  for  length,  frequency,  and  holiness,  may  be  justly  taken  in 
among  the  moral  laws.  He  that  shall  doubt  of  such  a  powerful 
influence  of  special  time  for  the  furthering  of  what  is  specially 
good,  may  look  upon  the  art,  skill,  trade,  learning,  nay,  grace  it- 
self perhaps,  which  be  hath  got  by  the  help  of  the  improvement 
of  lime  i  a  profane  and  religious  heart  are  seen  and  accounted 
of  according  to  their  improvements  of  lime,  more  or  less,  in  holy 
things.  Time  is  not  therefore  such  a  circumstance  as  is  good 
only  because  coramanded,  (as  the  place  of  the  temple  was,)  but  it 
is  commanded  because  it  is  good,  because  time,  nay,  much  time, 
reiterated  in  a  weekly  sevenili  part  of  time,  doth  much  advance 
and  set  forward  that  which  is  good. 

T%esis  138.  That  law  which  is  a  homogeneal  part  of  the 
moral  law  is  moral ;  but  the  fourth  commandment  is  such  a  part 
of  the  moral  law,  and  therefore  it  is  moral.  I  do  not  say,  that 
that  law  which  is  set  and  placed  among  the  moral  laws  in  order 
of  writing,  (as  our  adversaries  too  frequently  mistake  us  in,)  tliat 
it  is  therefore  moral ;  for  then  it  might  be  said,  as  well,  that  the 
Sabbath  is  ceremonial,  because  it  is  placed  in  order  of  writing 
among  things  ceremonial,  (Lev.  xxiii.;)  but  if  it  be  one  link  of 
the  chain,  and  an  essential  part  of  the  moral  law,  then  it  is  un- 
doubtedly moral  i  but  so  it  is,  for  its  part  of  the  decalogue,  nine 
parts  whereof  all  our  adversaries  we  now  contend  with  confess  to 
be  moral;  and  to  make  this  fourth  ceremonial,  which  God  hath 
set  in  the  heart  of  the  decalogue,  and  commanded  us  to  remem- 
ber to  keep  it  above  any  other  law,  seems  very  nnlike  to  truth 
to  a  serene  and  sober  mind,  not  disturbed  with  such  mud,  which 
usually  lies  at  the  bottom  of  the  heart,  and  turns  light  into  dark- 
ness ;  and  why  one  ceremonial  precept  should  be  shufQed  in  among 
tlio  rest  which  are  of  another  tribe,  lineage,  and  language,  hath 
l>een  by  many  attempted,  but  never  soundly  cleared  unto  this 
day.  Surely  if  this  commandment  be  not  moral,  then  there  are 
but  nine  commandments  left  to  us  of  the  moral  law,  which  is 
expressly  contrary  to  God's  account,  (Dcul.  iv.) 





To  alfirm  that  all  the  connnaDtla  of  the  decalogue  are  moral, 
f  et  tivery  one  in  liis  proportion  and  degreo,  and  Ibat  ibis  of  the 
Sabbatli  is  ihua  mora],  viz.,  in  respect  of  llie  purpose  aod  intent  / 
of  the  Lawgiver,  vix.,  that  some  lime  be  set  apari,  but  not  moral 
in  respect  of  the  letter  in  whicli  it  is  expressed :  it  is  in  some 
sense  formerly  explained ;  true,  but  in  Lia  gcnse  who  endeavors 
to  prove  the  Sabbitlh  ceremonial,  while  he  saith  it  is  moral,  is  ' 
Uitb  dark  and  false ;  for  if  it  be  said  to  be  moral  only  in  respect 
of  some  time  to  be  set  apart,  and  this  lime  an  indiinduum  cagum, 
an  indeterminate  time,  beyond  tbe  verges  of  a  seventh  part  of 
(■me,  then  there  is  no  more  morality  granted  to  the  fourth  com- 
laandmeol  than  lo  the  commandment  of  building  the  temple  and  ' 
observing  the  new  moons ;  because  in  God's  command  to  build 
the  temple,  ifae  general  purpose  and  intention  of  the  Lawgiver 
was,  that  some  place  be  appointed  ibr  his  public  worship,  and  in 
commanding  to  observe  new  moon^,  that  some  time  be  set  apart 
for  Lis  worship,  and  so  there  was  no  more  necessity  of  putting 
remember  to  keep  the  Sabbath  holy,  tlinn  to  remember  lo  keep 
holy  the  new  moons.  And  look,  as  [he  commandment  to  observe 
new  moon!!  can  not  in  reason  be  accounted  a  moral  command- 
ment, because  there  is  some  general  morality  in  il,  viz.,  for  to 
observe  some  time  of  worship,  so  neither  should  this  of  tlie  Sab< 
bath  be  upon  the  like  ground  of  some  general  morality  mixed  in 
il ;  and  therefore  for  Mr.  Ironside  to  say  that  the  law  of  the 
Sabbath  is  set  among  the  rest  of  the  moral  precepts,  because  it  is 
mixedly  ceremonial,  having  in  it  something  which  is  moral,  which 
othur  ceremonial  commands  (he  saith)  hare  not,  is  palpably  un- 
true ;  for  there  is  no  ceremonial  law  of  observing  Jewish  moons 
and  festivals,  but  there  was  something  generally  moral  in  them, 
vix.,  tlwt  (in  respect  of  the  purpose  and  intention  of  the  Lawgiver) 
some  lime  be  set  apart  for  God,  just  as  be  makes  this  of  keeping 
the  Sabbath. 

ThttU  139.  To  inu^ine  that  there  are  but  nine  moral  pre- 
cepts indeed,  and  that  they  are  called  ten  in  respect  of  the  greater 
part  according  to  which  things  are  usually  denominated,  is  an 
invention  of  Mr.  Primrose,  which  contains  a  pernicious  and 
poisonful  seed  of  making  way  for  the  razing  Out  of  the  decalogue 
more  laws  than  one  ;  for  the  same  answer  will  serve  the  turn  for 
cashiering  three  or  four  more,  the  greater  part  (suppose  six)  re- 
maining moral,  according  to  which  the  denomination  ariselh. 
For  although  it  be  true,  that  some  time  tlie  denomination  is 
according  to  the  greater  part,  viz.,  when  there  is  a  necessity  of 
mixing  divers  things  togi-ther,  as  in  a  heap  of  corn  witli  much 
GboB*,  or  a  butt  of  wine  where  there  be  many  lees,  yet  there  was 

V<'V>t(T1    Of    1 


■  .  iMXturv  •iiJ  jumbling  tojielher  of  mnrarK 
v.     Mr.  Primrose  tetb  us  that  he  doth  not 

■  tt  iUI  ike  roinmniidmtMtts  nrc  williout  PXi^iip- 
,1.^  *"•!  therefore  whj  may  Ihere  not  (snilh  he)  be 

kl  lunMi^  tbcin  ?     But  bj  tliM  reason  he  may  as  well 

B  vtber  nuio  from  being  moral  ntso;  rcH"  I  read  not 

M  Am  any  one  of  them  is  styled  by  that  name,  moral ; 

igk  it  be  truu  which  ho  saiib,  [hat  covenants  among 

nes  logoiher  of  divers  articles,  as  also  that 

^tvvwiwrt  (taken  in  some  sense)  sometimes  did  so,  yet  the 

l«Miaiit  ot  God  made  with  all  men  (as  we  shall  prove  [he  deca- 
ft'teue  \»)  ought  no[  to  be  so  mingled,  neither  could  it  be  »)  with- 
I'  w  upparrnt  eoutradietion,  viz.,  that  here  should  be  a  covenant 
I  vbick  bindelh  all  men  in  all  things  (o  observe  it  and  yet  sotne 

rrt  of  it,  being  (ceremonial,  slioald  not  hind  all  men  in  all  things 
comraonds  \  nor  ia  iliere  indeed  any  need  of  putting  in  one 
ceremonial  law,  considering  bow  easily  they  are  and  may  be 
reduced  lo  sundry  precepts  of  the  moral  law  as  appendices  thcre-i 
of,  without  such  shuffling  as  is  contended  for  here. 

Tliesig  1 40.  If  this  law  be  not  moral,  why  is  it  crowne<l  with 
the  aiuna  honor  that  the  rest  of  the  moral  precepts  are?  If  its 
dignity  be  not  equal  with  the  real,  why  hath  it  been  exalted  so 
high  in  equal  glory  with  them  ?  Were  the  other  nine  spoken 
tmracdiateiy  by  the  voice  of  Ood  on  Monnt  Sinai,  with  great 
terror  and  majesty,  before  all  the  people  ?  Were  they  written 
upon  titbles  of  stone  with  God's  own  finger  twice  ?  Were  they 
put  into  the  ark  as  most  holy  and  sncred  ?  So  was  this  of  tho 
Sabbath  also :  why  bath  it  the  same  honor,  if  it  be  oot  of  ibe 
same  nature  with  Ibe  rest? 

'JTiesit  HI.  Our  adversaries  turn  every  stone  lo  make 
answer  to  this  known  argument,  and  they  tell  us  lliat  it  is 
disputable  and  very  r|iiestionab]e,  whether  (his  law  was  sjioken 
immediately  by  God,  and  not  rather  by  angels  ;  but  let  it  be  how 
it  will  be,  yet  [bis  law  of  the  Sabbath  was  spoken  and  written, 
and  laid  up  as  all  the  rest  were,  and  therefore  liad  the  same 
honor  as  all  the  rest  hod.  which  we  donbt  not  to  he  moral ;  and 
jut  I  think  it  easy  to  demonstrate  that  ibis  law  was  immediately 
spoken  by  God,  and  the  reasons  against  it  are  long  since  answered 
by  Junius,  on  Heb.  ii.  2,  3  ;  but  it  is  useless  here  to  enter  into 
this  controversy. 

Tresis  142.  Nor  do  I  say  that  because  the  law  was  spoken 
by  God  immediately,  ibat  therefore  it  is  moral ;  for  he  spiiko 
with  Abraham,  Job,  Muses  in  the  mount,  immediately  alioiit  other 
matters  than  moral  laws  ;  but  because  he  thus  spake,  and  in  bucI) 



THE   MORALITY    OF  THE   S.inBlTH.  H9 

a  mnnner,  oi^dI;,  and  to  nil  Llie  people,  young  nnti  old,  Jews  and 
proselyte  Gentiles,  ilieii  present,  with  such  great  glory,  and  ter- 
ror, and  nwijesly,  surely  it  stands  not  (saitk  holy  Brigbtman) 
with  lite  majesty  of  tlie  universal  Lord,  who  is  God  not  only  of 
the  Jews,  but  also  of  the  Gentiles,  speaking  thus  openly,  (not 
privately,)  and  gloriously,  and  most  immediately,  to  prescribe  laws 
to  one  people  only,  which  were  emull  in  number,  but  wherewith 
alt  nations  alike  should  be  governed.  Mr.  Ironside  indeed  thinks 
that  the  Lord  had  gone  un  to  have  delivered  all  the  other 
ceremonials  in  the  like  manner  of  fBIPfrora  the  mount,  but 
tluU  the  fear  and  cry  of  the  peo[A^lJiat  he  would  speak  no 
more  to  them)  slopped  him;  but  the  oontrary  ismust  evident,  vix., 
that,  before  the  people  cried  out,  the  Lord  made  a  stop  of  him- 
■elf,  and  therefore  is  said  to  add  no  more.  (Deut.  v.  22.)  It  was 
A  glory  of  thu  gospel  above  all  other  mc^iuiges,  in  that  it  was 
immediately  spoken  by  Christ,  (Hcb.  i.  2 ;  ii.  3;)  and  so  Gud*s 
immediate  pnblication  of  the  moral  law  puts  a  glory  and  honor 
upon  it  above  any  other  laws ;  and  therefore,  while  Mr.  Ironside 
goes  about  to  put  the  sHme  honor  u|)on  ceremonial  laws,  he  doth 
nut  a  little  oliscure  and  cast  dishonor  upon  those  that  arc  moral, 
by  making  this  honor  to  be  common  with  ceremonial,  and  not 
proper  only  to  moral  laws. 

7*Aem  143,     Nor  do  I  say  that  the  writing  of  the  law  on 
Hone  argues  it  to  be  moral,  (for  some  laws  not  moral  were  me- 
diately writ  on  stone  by  Joshua,  (Josh.  viii.  32,)  but  because  it 
was  wiit  immediately  by  the  linger  of  God  on  such  tables  of 
«tane,  and  that  not  once,  but  twice ;  not  on  paper  or  parchment, 
but  on  stone,  which  argues  their  continuance ;  and  not  on  stone 
in  open  fields,  but  on  such  etone  as  was  laid  up  in  the  ark,a  place 
tl  most  safety,  being  most  sacred,  and  a  type  of  Christ,  who 
ipi  this  law,  and  upon  whose  heart  it  was  writ,  (Ps.  xl.  6,  7.)  to 
lisfy  justice,  and  to  make  just  and  righteous  before  God  all  that 
II  be  saved,  of  uU  whom  the  righteousness  of  ihie  law,  ac- 
inlingto  justice,  was  to  be  exaclcd.    What  do  lliese  things  argue 
ft  at  least  thu^  much,  thai  if  any  taw  was  to  be  perpetuated,  this 
ircly  ought  so  to  be  ?     Mr.  Primrose  iclls  us   that  the  writing 
I  stone  did  nut  signify  conlinuunce  of  the  law,  but  the  hard- 
of  their  stony  hearts,  which  the  law  writ  upon  them,  was 
ible  to  overcome  ;  and  it  is  true  timt  the  stony  tables  did 
_  ify  stony  hearts,  but  it  is  false  that  the  writing  on  stone 
4id  not  signify  continuance  also,  according  to  Scripture  phra 
for  all  the  children  of  God  have  stony  hearts  by  nature.    Now, 
Uod  hnth  promised  to  write  his  law  upou  such  hearts  as  are  by 
nature  tlony,  and  his  writing  of  them  there  Implies  the  contiiiu- 


13  • 


T««  «<.«kVTTT  or  TitK  JAniiATn. 




mf»  ti  thMW  tikNir ;  *>  ikiU  biith  iIicm:  mighl  stand  togetiier,  and 
Um  tiwili»aifc'  «•  Ulij  ihof,  vix^  ihc  nhulc:  law  of  Goil  was  nrit 
M  1»)th>  vt  «MMS  t0  txmtinup  tlirre  :  so  llie  whole  law  of  God 
k»  Wtil  <W  Mmy  tvemti*  Itr  iiaiure,  iv  coniinue  iliereon. 

ftMtk  144>  Onlv  mural  laws,  and  all  moral  laws,  are  tlius 
MWWMtiljr  «nd  iJMtcrall/  honored  by  God,  the  len  commBiiU- 
ITMfiili  bmg  Chrutiaii  piindt^ctd  and  coinraon  heads  of  nil  moral 
(hllivt  tQ«-Mtl  God  and  men  ;  under  which  general?,  all  the  par- 
tk'ulnrmornldultedmlhe  commenlaries  of  Uic  prophets  and  apos- 
tlnt  nra  virluAllj  c-omprcheDded  and  conUineil ;  and  thci-ufore 
Iklr.  Primrose's  argument  in  weak,  who  thinks  that  this  honor  put 
ii|Hin  (he  decalogue  doth  not  argue  il  to  be  moral,  because  then 
luan^  other  particular  moiiil  laws  set  down  in  Scripture,  not  in 
tables  of  slone,  but  in  paichmenls  of  the  prophets  and  aposlleR, 
should  not  be  moral :  for  we  do  not  say  that  all  moral  Liws  par- 
ticularly were  tlius  specially  honored,  but  that  all  and  only  moral 
laws  summarily  were  thus  honored  ;  in  which  summaries  all  ihe 

{articulars  arc  contained,  and,  in  that  respect,  equally  honored. 
t  may  ail'ect  one's  heart  wi[h  great  mourning  to  see  the  miiny 
inventions  of  men's  hearts  to  bloi  out  this  remembrance  of  the 
Sabbath  day :  they  first  coat  it  out  of  paradise,  and  shut  it  out  of 
the  world  until  Moses'  time ;  when  in  Moses'  time  it  is  published 
OS  a  law,  and  crowned  with  the  same  honor  as  all  other  munil 
laws,  yet  then  they  make  it  lo  be  but  a  ceremonial  law,  continu- 
ing only  until  the  coming  of  Clirist;  after  which  time  it  ceaseth 
to  be  any  law  at  all,  unless  the  church's  constitution  shall  please 
to  make  it  so,  which  is  worst  of  all. 

TTietit  Ho.  Every  thing,  indeed,  which  was  published  by 
God's  immediate  voice  in  promulgating  of  the  law  is  not  moral 
and  common  to  all ;  but  some  things  so  spoken  may  be  peculiar 
and  proper  to  the  Jewu,  because  some  things  thus  spoken  were 
promises  or  motives  only,  annexed  lo  the  law,  to  persuade  to  the 
obedience  thereof;  but  tliey  were  not  laws  ;  for  the  question  is, 
whether  all  laws  spoken  and  writ  thus  immediately  were  nut 
moral;  but  the  argument  which  some  produce  against  this  is, 
from  the  promise  muiexed  to  the  fitlli  command,  concerning  long 
life,  and  from  the  motive  of  redempUon  out  of  the  bouse  of 
bondage,  in  the  preface  to  the  commandments,  both  which  (they 
say)  were  sjioken  iinmediuteiy,  but  yet  were  both  of  iheni  proper 
unto  the  Jews.  But  suppose  the  promise  annexed  to  the 
fifth  commandment  be  proper  to  the  Jews,  and  ceremonial,  as 
Mr.  Primrose  pleads,  (which  yet  many  strong  reasons  from  Eph, 
vi.  2  may  induce  one  lo  deny,)  what  is  this  to  the  question? 
which  is  not  concerning  promises,  but  commandmeAts   antl  laws. 


^^  Wll 


Siippoite  also  llittt  ihe  motive  in  the  preface  of  the  commanii- 
nteDls.  lilorally  understood,  is  proper  to  llie  Jews ;  yel  tliis  is  also 
evident,  ihul  such  reasons  find  motives  as  are  proper  to  somp,  anil 
perhaps  ceremonial,  may  be  annexed  to  moral  laws,  which  lire 
common  lo  all  i  nor  wilt  it  follow  thai  hiws  are  therefore  not  enro^ 
non,  hecause  the  motives  tliercto  are  proper.  We  thai  dwell  in 
America  may  be  persuaded  to  love  and  fear  God  (which  arc 
norAl  dulie.')  in  regard  of  ourredemption  and  deliverances  fruni 
out  ofthose  vast  sea  elorms  we  once  bud,  and  tbe  tumults  in  Europe 
which  now  are,  which  motives  are  proper  lo  ourselves.  Pi'om- 
ites  aiul  motives  amiexed  to  the  commntidments  come  in  as' 
mean*  to  a  higher  end,  viz.,  obedience  to  the  laws  ihem^elvcs ; 
and  benee  (he  laws  themselves  may  be  moral,  and  these  not  su, 
though  iramediaiety  spoken,  because  ihey  be  not  chiefly  nor  lastly 
intended  herein.  I  know  Wallteus  makes  the  preface  lo  the 
CommHndments  &  part  of  tlie  Brst  commandment,  and  therefore 
lie  would  hence  infer  that  some  pun  (at  lensi)  of  a  command- 
ment is  proper  to  the  Jews  ;  but  if  these  words  contain  a  motive 
prea:iing  to  the  obedience  of  the  whole,  how  is  it  possible  that 
they  should  be  a  part  of  the  Inw,  or  of  any  one  law  ?  For  what 
force  of  a  law  can  there  be  in  that  which  only  declares  unto  us 
who  it  is  that  redeemed  ihem  out  of  Egypt's  bondage?  For  il  can 
not  be  true  (which  the  same  author  allirms)  in  these  words 
b  set  forth  only  who  that  Go<l  is  whom  we  are  to  have  lo  be  our 
God  in  the  first  commandment ;  bin  they  are  of  larger  c 
■buwini;  us  who  that  God  is  whom  we  are  to  worship,  according 
lo  tbe  hrst  commandment,  and  that  with  his  own  worship,  aci-oril^ 
ing  to  (be  second,  and  that  reverently,  according  to  the  third,  and 
whose  day  we  are  lo  sanctify,  according  lo  the  fourth,  and  whose 
will  we  are  to  do  in  all  duties  of  love  toward  man,  according  to 
the  MTeral  duties  of  the  second  table:  and  therefore  this  dcclu- 
rution  of  God  is  no  more  a  part  of  the  first  than  of  any  o 
nandraeni.  and  every  other  commandmeni  may  cliallenge  it  as  d 
part  of  themselves,  as  well  as  tbe  first. 

JTietii  HCi.  It  is  a  truth  tts  immovable  as  the  pillars  of 
1i«avcn,  that  God  hntli  given  to  all  men  universally  a  rule  of  life 
to  cunduci  them  to  their  end.  Xow.  if  the  whole  decalogue  be  nut 
It,  wiraishiill?  Thegosiwl  is  the  rule  of  our  fnilh,  but  nolof  uur 
gpiriiual  life,  which  jjows  from  faJlh.  (Gal.  ii.  20.  John  v.  2i.) 
TniS  law  ihercfore  isTEe  rule  of  our  lifg  ;  now,  if  nine  of  lhc*e 
be  B  complete  rule  witliout  a  tenth,  exclude  that  one,  and  thuii 
who  sees  not  an  o|ieii  gap  mode  tor  all  the  rest  logo  out  alal«o? 
For  wha-a  will  any  man  slop,  if  once  this  principle  be  laid,  viz., 
thai  the  whole  law  ii  nol  the  rule  of  life  ?  Itluy  nut  Tapist*  blot  . 
'Cond  nUo.  aa  some  of  Cussander**  followers  have  d" 

^  all  but  tn-o,  and  as  the  AntinommnB  at  Iliis  day  do  all  ?  And 
bSve  they  not  a  good  ground  laid  for  it,  wlio  n)ay  lienee  nafely 
Kity  lliat  llm  di^cnlogue  is  not  a  rule  ol'  life  for  all  ?  Mr. 
Primrose,  that  he  might  keep  himself  from  a  broken  head  here, 
sends  us  for  salve  to  Ibe  light  of  nature,  and  the  teElimony  of  the 
goiipel,  both  which  (sailh  he)  maintain  and  confirm  ihe  morality 
of  all  the  other  command  men  Is  except  this  one  of  the  Subbatli. 
But  Bs  it  sliftU  a|)pear  that  the  law  of  the  Sabbath  hnth  conHnna- 
tion  from  both,  (if  this  direction  was  sirtRetent  and  good.)  so  it 
may  be  in  the  mean  time  considered  why  the  Gentiles,  who  were 
universal  idolaters,  and  therefore  blotted  out  the  light  of  nature 
(as  Mr,  Primrose  confesseth)  against  the  second  commandment. 
might  not  as  well  blot  out  much  of  (hat  light  of  nature  about  the 
.Subbath  also;  and  then  how  shall  the  light  of  nature  be  any 
suflicient  discovery  unto  us  of  that  which  is  moral,  and  of  that 
which  is  not? 

TTietis  147.  There  is  a  law  made  mention  of,  James  ii.  10, 
whose  parts  are  so  inseparably  linked  together,  that  whosoever 
brt-aks  any  one  is  guilty  of  the  breach  of  all,  and  consequently 
whosoever  is  called  to  the  obedience  of  one  is  called  to  the  obe- 
dience of  all,  and  consequently  all  the  jiarticular  laws  which  it 
contains  are  homogeneal  parte  of  the  same  tolum,  or  whole  law. 
If  it  be  demanded.  What  is  this  law  ?  the  answer  is  writ  with 
tfiu  beams  of  the  sun,  that  it  is  the  whole  moral  law  contained  in 
the  decalogue.  For,  1.  The  afKistle  speaks  of  such  a  law,  which 
not  only  the  Jews,  but  all  the  Gentiles,  are  bound  to  observe,  and 
for  the  breach  of  any  one  of  which,  not  only  the  Jews,  but  the 
Gentiles  also,  were  guilty  of  the  brearh  of  all ;  and  therefore  it- 
can  not  he  meant  of  the  ceremonial  law,  which  did  neither  bind 
Gentiles  nor  Jews,  at  that  lime  wherein  the  apostle  writ.  2.  lie 
speaks  of  such  a  law  as  is  called  a  royid  law,  and  a  law  of  liberty, 
(ver.  8,  12.)  whiuh  can  not  be  meant  of  the  ceremonial  law  in 
whole  or  in  part,  which  is  called'n  law  of  bondage,  not  worthy 
the  royal  and  kingly  spirit  of  a  Christian  tosroop  to.  (Gal.  iv.  !l.) 
3.  It  is  ttint  law  by  the  works  of  which  all  men  are  bound  lo 
miinifest  their  faith,  and  by  which  faith  i^  mtide  perfect,  (ver.  2t?,) 
which  can  not  be  the  ceremonial  nor  evangelical,  for  that  is  the 
law  of  faith,  and  therefore  it  is  meant  of  the  law  moral.  4-.  It  is 
thai  law  of  which,  "Thou  shalt  not  kill,"  nor  "commit  adultery." 
are  parts,  (ver.  11.)  Now,  these  laws  are  part  of  the  decalogue 
only,  and  whereof  it  may  be  said  He  that  said,  "  Thou  elialt  not 
commit  adultery,"  said  also,  '■  Reraember  to  keep  the  Subbalh 
holy ; "  and  therefore  the  whole  decalogue,  and  not  some  parts  of  it 
/  only,  is  the  moral  law ;  from  whence  it  is  manifest  that  the  apostle 
'  doth  not  speak  (as  Mr.  Primrose  would  interpret  him)  of  oliend- 


ing  agninst  the  word  nt  large,  and  of  which  llie  ceremonial  laWB 
were  a  part,  bui  of  olTunding  ugninst  lliut  pnrt  of  llie  word,  to 
wit,  the  moral  law,  of  which  he  that  offerKls  against  any  one  ta 
fjuitty  of  the  breach  of  all ;  hence,  also,  his  olher  answer  falls  to 
the  dusl.  viz..  that  the  fourth  command  ii  no  part  of  tlie  law, 
anil  therefore  the  not  observing  of  it  ia  no  sin  um^er  the  New 
Testament,  because  it  was  given  only  to  the  Jewa.and  not  lo  us; 
for  if  it  be  a  part  of  the  decalogue,  of  which  the  apostle  only 
speaks,  then  it  is  a  mere  begging  of  the  question,  tu  alfirm  that 
it  is  no  part  of  the  law  to  Christians.  But  we  se«  the  apostle 
Itcre  s|>«ulu  of  the  law  and  the  royal  law,  and  the  royal  taw  of 
liberty  i  his  meaning  therefore  must  be  of  some  special  law, 
which  he  calls  »ai'  iiojii;r,  the  law.  Now.  if  he  thus  speaks  of 
•oinc  special  law,  what  can  it  be  but  the  whole  decalogue,  and 
not  a  part  of  it  only?  aa  when  he  speaks  of  the  gospel  ■«'  (inx^y, 
he  means  not  some  part,  but  the  whole  gospel  also;  and  if  every 
part  of  the  decalogue  is  not  moral,  how  should  any  man  know 
from  any  law  or  rule  of  God  what  was  moral,  and  what  not  ? 
and  consequently  what  is  sinful,  and  what  not  ?  If  it  be  said, 
by  the  light  of  nature,  we  have  proved  that  this  is  a  blind  and 
corrupt  judge,  as  it  exbts  in  corrupt  man  ;  if  it  be  said  by  the 
light  of  the  gospel,  this  was  then  to  set  up  a  light  unto  Christians  ■ 
to  diiicern  it  by,  but  none  to  the  Jews  while  they  wantL-d  the 
gospel  as  dispensed  lo  us  now ;  many  moral  laws  also  are  not 
mentioned  tn  the  gospel,  it  being  but  occidental  to  it  to  set  forth 
ihn  coratoandmcnts  of  the  law. 

TKnrtf  US.  If  Christ  came  to  fulfill,  and  not  to  destroy,  tb« 
law,  (Matt-  V.  17.)  then  the  commandment  of  the  Subbalh  is  iwt 
aboliiihed  by  Christ's  coming;  if  not  one  jot,  pric&,  or  tittle  of 
ihe  law  shall  {>erish,  much  less  shall  a  whole  law  perish  or  be 
destroyed  by  the  coming  of  Christ 

7%em  149.  It  is  true,  indeed,  tliat  by  bw  and  prophets  is 
sometimes  meant  their  whole  doctrine,  both  ceremonial,  moral, 
and  prophetical,  which  Christ  fulfilled  personalty,  but  not  so  in 
this  place  of  Matthew  ;  but  by  law  is  meant  the  moral  law,' and 
by  prophets  those  prophetical  illustruiions  and  interpretation* 
(hereof,  in  whicli  the  prophets  do  alKiund.  For,  I.  The  Lord 
Christ  spcflks  of  tliat  luw  only,  which  whosoever  should  tencb 
men  lo  break  and  ca^it  off,  he  should  be  least  in  tlie  kingdom  of 
betiven,  (Matt.  V.  19;)  but  the  apostles  did  teach  men  to  coat 
olf  the  ceremonial  law,  and  yet  were  never  a  whit  less  in  the 
kingdom  of  heaven.  3.  He  speaks  of  that  luw  by  confoiiniiy 
tu  which  all  his  true  disciples  should  exceed  the  righleuusncsH 
of  Kribea  Bad  Pharisees ;  but  lltal  waa  not  by  being  extemally 


bM.l<'»i  H*  if 
law  ai  V-M. 

»>iU  HlU 

AM  U»d  It  .< 

rMi»>v  i<  I'xi 

IOkIiiI,  111! 


JJJ  THE    MDRAI.irr    OK    TIIK    SAUll.VTH. 

eeirmonioiia  or  nioiul,  but  by  iiiU>miil  confiirmiiy  to  Uje  spirit- 
onlnpsis  of  God's  Ih«-.  wliic-li  iho  I'linri-rw  tlien  reganled  not. 
S.  Clirisl  i-pciikii  ol'  the  IchbI  (viiimimiliiwnts,  nml  of  these  least 
coinnmniimi-nW, ,«/«  rflf  ^ftoifir  ui'™*-  t'll»-  ria»io(w.  Now,  what 
■lioiilU  llnwi-  l(iv«l  wmmttiidiwiitM  be  but  timse  wliich  ht  nfitr- 
ir«nl*  iiituriiri'iji  ol'  riwh  mipr,  ndiiltenwn  ttyi>«,  unclioste  thougbi.s 
lovi>  to  cni'iHitvi.  vn\,  wliiiTi  wv  willwl  Icnsl,  In  opposition  to  the 

ShHi'i'>uk>itl  iliM'iiu-*'  t>UHH>(|i  lit  llitwK  tliue*.  who  urged  the  gross 
iiIJvi  i-wninnmliHl,  hihI  i,\wj\-inii*^l  turn  only  for  gross  sins  for- 
,  t\ui«u1«<it  t>iir  ounipttriH  coiilbrmiij  to  ilie 
lnuti.rt',  liy  ihf  Iwwt  of  tboac  cominand- 
liiHii  tJKwi*  which  he  afturwarils  seta 
I  MiMlionot'  the  law,  (ver.  21.)  never 
ii-i  Mv  eeromonial,  but  moral  lawg; 
iliinkg  that  there  is  no  conneclion 
»ili  iiikI  iIip  oibcr  expoaitor*8  verses  of  the 
whiwuiivcr  ponders  the  onalyeia  impartially 
11!,  ovuii  from  the  seventeenth  verse  to  the 
111'  whivh  is,  to  be  perfect  as  our  heaveuly 
>  i'  never  made  a  pattern  of  perfection  to 
iiiily  in  moral  miitlcre.  Il  is  true,  indeed, 
(wlihih  •unir  oliji'i't.)  iliiii  then]  is  mention  made  of  ahar  and 
t>ni'r|/ltH',  (vei-.  iji't,)  tvhk'ii  wura  cereraoniaJs ;  but  lliere  ia  no 
law  nUtnt  llivin,  but  only  n  moritl  law  of  love  is  thereby  pressed 
with  ulhiilim  to  the  oenimonial  prnclice  in  those  limes ;  ho 
kixHtkn  iiIk'  nlxiut  dlvon-e,  but  this  is  but  Kccidenlally  brought  to 
•liiiw  llu'  uwrAlity  tif  Iho  law  of  adultery;  the  kw  of  relalialion 
WHUI*  no)  hum)  witiioMQH  to  testily  to  the  morality  of  it,  but  I 
VUllifc  ihluk  il  1>  brought  In  to  set  forth  a  moral  law  against 
pIVHli^  ii'vi'njp*.  Uuv  Sttviour,  iiid(5cd,  doth  not  spciik  pnrlic- 
uUrly  iiUuil  lhf>  Ihw  uf  the  S<ibliulh,  ■»  tie  doth  of  killing,  and 
fttllihvry,  »lu.  I  but  If  tbert-fore  it  be  uoi  moral,  because  not  spoken 
of  lltire,  lh>'n  iiuiiher  [ho  first,  sceond,  nor  fiflli  commanil  are 
HK>n4i  Iwcftunt'  they  «r«  not  expressly  opened  in  this  cbaplor  ; 
foi"  tliH  m-ope  of  our  Saviour  was  to  speBk  a^iinst  the  pharisa- 
tiuil  luieiprplnliona  of  the  law,  in  curluilinf;  of  il.  in  making  gross 
UlurdiT  to  bo  forbidden,  but  not  anger;  adultery  lo  be  forbidden, 
but  not  lust  i  which  evil  they  were  not  so  much  guilty  of  in  |>oint 
of  tlio  Subbiah ;  but  they  rather  made  the  phyUclvries  of  it  too 
brortd  by  overmuch  strictness,  which  our  Saviour  ihorufore  else- 
where eondemns,  but  not  a  word  lending  to  abolish  this  law  of 
tl>e  Kubbath. 

Tnetit  130.     If,   therefore,  the  copmaiidment  is  to  be  ac- 
counted moral  wliich  the  gospel  reiinforcelh,  an4  commends  unto 



A  ni. 



Hi,  (according  to  Mr.  Primrose's  principles,)  tlicn  the  fourth 
'inenl  may  wkU  come  into  llie  nccouot  of  such  as  are 
montl ;  but  the  pliti.-BS  mentioned  and  cleared  out  of  the  New 
TesUunent  evince  tliua  much:  the  Lord  Jesus  coming  not  to 
destroy  the  luw  of  the  Sabbath,  but  lo  estabKsh  it ;  and  of  the 
breach  of  wliich  one  law  he  that  is  guilty  is  guilty  of  the  breach 
of,  all. 

Thetit  1.>1.  If  the  observation  of  the  Sabbath  had  been  Hrstf 
impelled  upon  man  since  the  fall,  and  io  special  upon  the  people' 
of  the  Jews  at  Mount  Sinai,  there  might  be  then  some  color  and 
reason  to  clothe  the  Sabbath  with  rags  and  the  worn-out  gar- 
meuts  of  cereraonialness ;  but  if  it  was  imposed  upon  man  in  in- 
iKicency,  not  only  before  all  types  and  ceremonies,  but  also  before 
all  sin,  and  upon  Adam  as  a  common  pennon,  as  a  commandment 
not  proper  lo  that  estate,  nor  as  to  a  particular  person,  and  proper 
lo  himself,  then  the  morality  of  it  is  most  evident ;  our  adver- 
Mirie?,  ilierefure,  lay  about  them  here,  that  they  might  drive  the 
Sabbath  out  of  par.ulise,  and  make  it  a  thing  altogether  unknown  I 
to  the  slate  of  innocency  ;  which  if  they  can  not  make  good,  their 
whole  frame  against  (he  morality  of  the  Sabbath  falls  Hal  to  the 
ground  ;  and  therefore  it  is  of  do  small  coiisetjuence  to  clear  up 
this  truth,  viz.,  that  Adam  in  innocency,  and  in  him  all  his  pos- 
terity, were  commanded  to  sanctify  a  weekly  Sabbath. 

TTietit  152.  One  would  think  that  the  words  of  the  te=t 
(Gon.  ii.  2,  3)  were  so  plain  to  prove  a  Sabbath  in  that  innocent 
ntaic  that  there  could  be  no  evasion  mode  from  ihe  evidence  of 
them ;  for  it  is  expressly  said,  that  the  day  the  Lord  rested,  the 
lame  day  the  Lord  blessed  and  sanctified ;  but  we  know  lie  rested 
the  seventh  day  immediately  at\er  the  creation,  and  therefore  ho 
Immediately  blessed  and  BanctiJicU  llie  same  day  also ;  for  the 
words  run  copulativcly,  hu  rested  the  seventh  day,  "and  he 
blessed  and  sanctified  that  day;"  but  il  is  strange  lo  see.not  only 
what  odd  evasions  men  make  from  this  clear  truth,  but  also  what 
ouriuus  cabalisms  and  food  interpretations  men  make  of  llie  lie- 
brew  text,  the  answer  to  which  learned  Rivet  hath  bug  ainco 
made,  which  therefore  I  mention  not. 

TkftU  133.  The  words  are  not  thus  copulative  in  order  of 
•(ory,  but  in  orJer  of  liute  ;  I  say  not  in  order  of  story  and  dis- 
eourse,  for  so  tilings  for  distant  iu  time  may  be  coupled  togulher 
by  this  copulative  particle  and,  as  Mr.  Primrose  truly  shows, 
(Ex.  xvi.  32,  ao :  1  Sam.  xvii.  51 ;)  but  ilicy  are  coupled  arid 
knit  together  in  respect  of  time ;  for  it  is  the  like  phrase  which 
Uosea  immedialely  after  useth,  (Gen.  v.  I,  3,)  where  it  is  said, 
:  **  God  created  tnao  in  his  image,  and  bleased  them,  and  called 





tfieir  names,"  elc-i  which  were  lojielher  in  times  so  it  is  lierej 
the  time  God  reeled,  ihnt  time  God  blessed  ;  t'ur  the  scope  of 
:  wards  (Gen.  ii.  1~3)  is  to  show  whnt  the  Lord  did  that 
'enth  day,  after  the  finishing  of  the  whole  creation  in  six  days, 
and  that  ia,  he  ble^ed  and  sanctified  it.  For,  look,  as  the  Bwjjie 
of  Moses  in  muking  mention  of  the  six  days  orderly  was  to  slion 
what  God  did  every  particular  day,  so  what  else  should  be  ttie 
scope  in  Diukiiig  mention  of  the  seventh  day,  unless  it  was  to 
show  what  God  did  then  on  thutday?  and  (bat  is,  he  then  rested, 
and  blessed  and  sanctified  it,  even  then  in  that  state  of  inno- 

TTtesia  154.  God  is  said  (Gen.  ii.  1-3)  to  bless  the  Subbath 
as  he  blessed  other  creatures ;  hut  be  blessed  the  creatnres  at 
tliat  time  ibey  were  made,  (Gen.  i.  12,  28,)  and  therefore  ho 
blessed  the  Sabbath  at  that  lime  he  rested.  Shall  God's  woik 
be  presently  blessed,  and  shull  his  reiil  be  then  witlioul  any? 
-Wfts  Go<ra  rest  a  cause  of  sanctifying  the  day  many  hundred 
years  after,  (as  our  adversaries  say,)  and  was  there  not  as  much 
cause  then  when  the  memory  of  tlie  creation  was  most  fresh, 
whieh  was  the  fittest  time  to  remember  God's  work  in?  Mr. 
Primrose  tells  us  thai  the  creatures  were  blessed  with  a  present 
benediction,  because  Ihey  did  eonstantly  need  it ;  but  there  was 
no  necessity  (he  saitb)  llnil  man  should  solemnize  the  seventb 
as  soon  as  it  is  made ;  but  as  we  sball  show  that  man  did  then 
need  a  special  day  of  blessing,  so  it  is  a  anfficieut  ground  of 
believing  that  then  God  blessed  the  day  when  there  was  a  full, 
and  just,  and  sufficient  cause  of  blessing,  which  ta  God's  reeling; 
it  being  also  Bucb  a  cause  as  was  not  peculiar  to  the  Jews  many 
hundred  years  after,  but  common  lo  all  mankind. 

ITiesis'  155.  The  rest  of  God  (wliicb  none  question  lo  be  in 
innocency  immodiaiely  after  the  creation)  was  either  a  natural 
rest,  (as  1  may  call  it,)  that  is,  a  bare  cessation  from  labor,  or  a 
holy  rest,  i.  e.,  a  rest  »e\.  apart  t'n  eiemplum,  or  for  example,  and 
for  holy  uses  ;  but  it  was  not  a  natural  rest  merely,  for  tlifn  it  had 
been  enougli  lo  have  eaid,  that  at  the  end  of  the  sixth  day  God 
rested;  but  we  see  God  speaks  of  a  day,  the  seventh  day.  God 
hath  rested  with  a  natural  rest  or  cessation  from  creation  ever 
since  the  end  of  the  first  sixth  day  of  the  world  until  now  ;  why 
then  is  it  said  that  G04I  rested  the  seventh  day  ?  or  why  is  it  not 
rather  said  that  he  began  his  rest  on  that  day,  but  that  it  is 
limited  to  a  day  ?  Certainly  this  argues  that  he  speaks  not  of 
natural  rest  merely,  or  that  wliicb,  ex  natura  rei,  follows  the 
finishing  of  bis  work  ;  for  it  is  itien  an  unfit  and  improper  speech 
to  limit  God's  rest  wiihin  the  circle  of  a  day;  and  therefore 


he  epeaks  of  a  holy  rest  (hen  nppoinled  for  holy  uses  as  nn 
example  for  ligly  vaU  which  niiiy  well  be  limited  wirhin  the 
uf  a  day ;  and  htnee  it  uiitleiiiiibly  tullows,  that  if  God 
rusted  in  innixrvncj  niih  such  a  rest,  then  the  seventh  day  wm 
then  mnclifi<!d,  it  being  the  day  of  holy  reiit, 

T^Hi'f  16G.  It  utn  not  be  shown  tliat  ever  God  made  himself 
,n  fXAinpIc  of  any  act,  but  that  in  the  present  esatn  pie  there  ivaa 
nd  is  a  present  rulf,  binding  iminediulely  to  follow  that  exiunple ; 
r  therefore,  from  tlie  foundntion  of  the  world,  God  made  himself 
an  example  in  six  days'  labor  and  in  a  seventh  day'^  rest,  why 
should  not  this  example  then  and  at  tbat  time  of  innocency  bn 
binding,  there  being  no  example  which  God  sets  before  us  but  it 
suppoacth  a  rule  binding  us  immediately  thereunto?  The  gi^at 
ind  roost  high  God  could  have  made  [lie  world  in  a  moment  or 
n  a  hundred  years ;  why  did  lie  make  it  then  in  six  days,  and 
rested  the  «even[b  day,  but  that  i(  might  be  an  example  to  man?. 
■rident  thai,  ever  since  the  world  began,  man's  life  w^^ 
be  spent  in  lalior  and  action  which  God  could  have  appointed  to* 
coniomplationonlyi  nor  will  any  euy  that  his  life  should  be  spent 
fluly  in  labor,  and  never  have  any  special  day  of  rest,  (unless  tliA 
AntinomiunvS  who  herein  sin  against  the  light  of  nature  ;t/if  there! 
fore  God  was  exemplary  in  h'm  six  days"  labor,  why  slfould  any 
itink  but  that  he  was  thus  also  in  his  seventh  day's  rest  ?  point- 
ing out  unto  man  most  visibly  (as  it  were]  thereby  on  what  day 
he  should  rest.  A  meet  lime  for  labor  was  a  moral  duty  since 
man  was  framed  upon  earth  j  God  therefore  gives  man  an  ex- 
ample of  it  iu  making  the  world  in  six  diiys,  A  meet  time  for 
holy  rest,  the  end  of  all  holy  and  honest  labor,  was  mnch  more 
moral,  (the  end  being  better  than  the  means ;)  wby  then  waa  not 
the  example  of  this  also  seen  in  God's  rest  ?  Mr.  Ironside,  in- 
deed, is  at  a  stand  here,  and  confesseih  his  ignorance  in  con- 
d'iriug  liow  God's  working  six  days  should  be  exemplary  to  man 
In  innocency,  it  being  not  preceptive,  hut  permissive  only  to  man 
in  his  apostasy.  JJut  let  a  plain  analysis  be  made  of  the  motives 
used  to  press  obetlience  to  (he  tburlh  command,  and  we  shall  find 
(according  to  the  consent  of  all  tlic  orthodox  not  prejudiced  in 
ibis  controversy)  that  God's  example  of  working  six  days  in  cre- 
ating the  world  is  held  forth  as  a  motive  (o  press  God's  people 
to  do  all  their  work  within  six  days  also;  und  the  very  reason 
of  our  labor  and  rurt  now  is  tbe  example  of  God's  labor  and 
■  nsi  then,  as  may  also  appear,  £x.  xxxi.  17.  And  to  say  lliat 
[  those  words  in  the  commandment  (vii,,  six  days  thou  slinlt  labor) 
I  mr«  DO  way  preceptive,  but  merely  promissivc,  is  both  cross  to  the 
I  Uprow  letter  uf  the  text,  and  contrary  to  moral  equity,  to  alloir 
TUL.  iti.  14 




uij  pnrt  or  Ihe  0ix  dnys  for  Hitiful  idleness  or  neglect  of  our 
weekly  work,  so  far  forih  as  the  rest  upon  the  Sabbnlh  be 
hindered  hereby, 

7%NI(  157.  Tlie  word  mnelijitd  is  Tnriously  taken  in  Scrip- 
ture, and  various  lliings  are  variously  and  differently  esnctilied; 
yet  in  this  place,  when  God  is  said  to  Eanctify  the  Salibatli,  (Gen. 
ii.  2,  3,)  it  ninst  be  one  of  these  two  ways:  either,  1.  By  infusion 
of  holiness  and  snnctifi cation  into  it,  as  holy  men  are  said  lo  be 
eanclified ;  or,  3.  By  separation  of  it  from  common  use,  and  dedi- 
cation of  it  to  holy  use,  ns  the  temple  and  altar  are  said  to  be 

Thetii  138.  God  did  not  sanctify  the  Sabbatli  by  infusion  of 
any  habitual  holiness  into  it,  for  the  circumsiance  of  a  seventh 
day  is  not  capable  thereof,  whereof  only  rational  creatures,  men 
and  angels,  are. 

TTutit  159.  It  must  therefore  be  said  to  be  sanctified  in  re- 
spect of  its  separation  from  common  use,  and  dediciiion  lo  holy 
use,  as  the  temple  and  labernncle  were,  which  yet  had  no  inhei*- 
eot  holinees  in  them.  > 

Tlittii  1 60.  Now,  if  Ihe  Snbbalh  van  thus  sanctified  by  dedi- 
cation, it  must  be  either  for  the  use  of  God  or  of  man  ;  i.  e.,  either 
that  God  might  keep  this  holy  day,  or  that  man  might  observe  it 
as  a  holy  day  Eo  God  ;  but  what  dishonor  is  it  lo  God  lo  put  him 
up0[i  the  observation  of  a  holy  day  ?  aud  therefore  it  was  dedi- 
cated and  consecrated  for  man's  sake  and  use,  that  so  he  might' 
observe  it  as  holy  unlo  God. 

TTieih  IGl.  This  day  therefore  is  said  lo  be  sanctified  of 
God  that  man  might  sunelify  it  and  dedicate  it  unlo  God ;  and 
hence  follows,  that  look,  as  man  could  never  have  lawfully  dedi- 
cated it  unto  God,  wilbout  a  precedent  institution  from  God,  so 
the  institution  of  G^  implies  a  known  command  given  by  God 
unlo  man  thereunto. 

Hifsig  162.  It  is  therefore  evident,  that  when  God  is  said  to 
sanctify  the  Sabbath,  (Gen.  ii.  2,  3,)  that  man  is  commanded 
hereby  to  sanctify  it,  and  dedicate  it  to  Ihe  holy  use  of  God. 
Sancttficare  est  lanclijtcart  mandare,  saith  Junius  ;  and  therefore, 
if  Mr.  Primrose  and  others  desire  to  know  where  God  com- 
mandelh  the  observation  of  the  Sabbath  in  Gen.  ii.  2,  they  may 
see  it  here  necessarily  implied  in  the  word  »anetify.  And  tlicre- 
fore,  if  God  did  sanctify  the  Sabbath  immediately  after  Ihe  CR-a- 
tion,  he  commanded  man  to  sanctify  it  then ;  for  so  the  word 
tnnctifiird  is  ei]iressly  expounded  by  llie  Holy  Ghost  himself. 
(Deut.  V.  15.)  We  need  net  therefore  seek  for  wood  among  trees, 
and  inquire  where,  and  when,  and  upon  what  ground  the  palri- 




STchs  before  Uoses  obsen'ed  a  Sabballj,  whcnns  it  was  famoutilj 
dedicaled  and  eanctitied,  i.  e,,  commtuiiled  lo  be  sanclifiei),  from 
tbe  firsi  foundation  of  the  world. 

TAmii  163.  Our  adversaries,  therefore,  daxzled  with  the  clear- 
ness of  the  light  shining  forih  from  the  teil.  (Gen.  ii.  2.)  to  wit, 
tlint  ibe  Sabbaib  was  comaianded  to  be  sanclilied  before  tbe  fall,  ■ 
do  dy  to  their  shifts,  and  seek  for  refuge  froai  several  answers ; 
soipelimes  they  any  it  is  sanctified  by  way  of  destinntlon,  some- 
times they  tell  us  of  anticipation,  soraelimes  they  think  the  Imok 
of  Genesb  was  writ  after  ExoduR.  and  many  such  inventions ; 
wbich  because  they  can  not  possibly  stand  one  with  another,  are 
therefore  more  fit  lo  vex  and  perplex  the  mind  than  to  Bfttisfy 
eonseienoe ;  and  indeed  do  argue  much  uncerlainiy  to  be  in  the 
minds  of  tho^  that  make  tlieae  and  the  like  a:iswer»,  as  not 
knowing  certainly  what  to  say,  nor  where  lo  stand :  yet  let  Ui 
examine   them. 

Thriii  ICA.  To  imagine  that  the  book  of  Genesis  was  writ 
atWr  Exodus,  and  yet  to  uflirm  that  the  Sabbath  in  Genesis  is 
mid  to  be  sanctified  and  blessed,  only  in  way  of  destination,  i.  e., 
because  God  destiiialeil  and  ordained  that  it  should  be  sanctified 
many  years  afler,  seems  to  be  an  ill-favored  and  misshapen  an- 
■wer,  and  no  way  fit  to  serve  their  turn  who  invent  it ;  for  if  it  * 
was  writ  af\er  Exodus,  what  need  was  lliere  lo  say  that  it  was 
dt^iinated  and  ordained  to  be  sanctified  for  time  lo  come?  when- 
as  upon  tliis  supposition  the  Sabbath  was  already  aanciified 
for  time  pa.«t,  as  appears  in  the  story  of  Ex.  xix.  20.  And 
therefore  Sir.  Primrose  translates  the  words  ihua :  that  God 
rested,  and  halh  blessed  and  hath  sanctified  the  seventh  day,  as 
if  Mnses  writ  of  it  as  a  thing  past  already  ;  but  what  irulh  is 
there  then  to  speak  of  a  destination  for  time  to  come  ?  I  know 
Junius  so  renders  the  Hebrew  words,  as  al*o  the  word  retted  ; 
but  we  know  bow  many  ways  some  of  the  Hebrew  tenses  look, 
nor  i«  it  any  matter  now  to  trouble  ourselves  about  them.  This 
only  may  be  considered,  that  it  is  a  mere  uncertain  shift  to  affirm 
that  Genesis  was  writ  after  Exodus.  Mr.  Ironside  tcIU  us  he 
eould  give  strong  reasons  for  it,  but  he  produceth  none ;  and  as 
for  bis  authorities  from  human  testimonies,  we  know  it  is  not  tit 
lo  weigh  out  truth  by  human  suffrages;  and  yet  herein  ibey  do 
not  ca*t  the  scale  for  Genesis  to  be  writ  after  Exodus  j  for 
although  Beda,  Abalcnsis,  and  divers  late  .lesuils  do  affirm  it, 
yet  Euitebius,  Catlmrinus,  Alcuinus,  a  Lapide,  and  sundry  others, 
both  Popish  and  Prolestuni  writers,  are  better  judgmcnted  here- 
in ;  and  their  reasons  for  Genesis  to  be  the  first  boni,  tts  it  is  first 
Ml  dowo,  seem  u>  be  most  strong.     The  casting  of  this  cause 

therefore  depends  not  upon  sut'li  i 
disorder  were  granted,  it  will  do  their  ei 
were,  might  he  made  nmnifesL 

Tlietit  165.  Mr.  Irun^ido  cnntuRGeth,  tliat  God's  resting  and 
RADC^fying  the  Sabbath  are  eoeinneous.  and  acknowledgeih  the 
connection  of  them  logeilier  at  the  same  lime,  by  the  copulative 
and;  and  that  as  God  uclually  rested, so  he  aelually  saiiciiSed  the 
day.  But  this  sanclitieation  wtiieb  he  means  is  nothing  else  but 
d^lination,  or  God's  purpose  and  intention  to  sanctity  it  alYer- 
wanl ;  so  that,  in  cfiect,  tliis  evasion  amounts  lo  thus  much,  viz., 
that  God  did  actaally  purpose  to  sanctify  it  about  twenty-five 
hundred  years  after  the  giving  of  the  law,  but  yet  did  not  ac- 
tually sanctify  it ;  and  if  this  be  the  meaning,  it  is  all  one  as  if  he 
bad  said  in  plain  terms,  viz.,  that  when  God  is  said  to  sanctify 
tlie  Sabbath,  he  did  not  indeed  sanctify  it,  only  he  purposed  so 
lo  do ;  and  although  Mr.  PrimroEe  and  himself  tells  us  that  the 
word  tanetify  signifies,  in  the  original,  some  time  to  prepare  and 
ordain,  so  it  may  be  said  that  the  word  signifies  sometimes  to 
publith  and  proclaim.  If  ihey  say  that  this  latter  can  not  be  the 
meaning,  because  we  Feod  not  in  Scripture  of  any  such  procla- 
mation that  this  should  be  the  Sabbath,  the  like  may  be  said  (u)>on 
the  reasons  mentioned)  concerning  their  destination  of  it  there- 
unto. Again :  if  to  sanctify  the  day  be  only  to  purpose  and  ordain 
to  sanctify  it,  then  the  Sabbath  was  no  more  sanctified  since  the 
creation  than  ah  lElemo,  and  before  the  world  began,  tor  then 
God  did  purpose  that  it  sluiuld  be  aanclified;  but  tliis  sanctifica- 
tion  here  spoken  of  seems  to  follow  God's  resting,  which  was  in 
time,  and  therefore  it  must  be  understood  of  another  sanctifica- 
tion  than  that  which  seems  to  be  before  all  time.  Again ;  as 
God  did  not  bless  the  Sabbath  in  way  of  destination,  so  neither 
did  he  sanctify  it  in  way  of  destination ;  but  he  did  not  bless  it  in 
way  of  destination,  for  let  them  produce  but  one  Scripture  where 
the  word  bleited  is  taken  in  this  sense,  for  a  purpose  only  to 
bless.  Indeed,  they  think  they  have  found  out  this  purpose  lo 
sanctify  in  the  word  saaclijied,  (Is.  xiiL  3 ;)  but  where  will  they 
find  the  like  for  the  word  blessed  u\so?  For  as  the  day  was 
blessed,  so  it  was  sanctified ;  and  yet  I  think  that  the  Medes  and 
Persians,  in  Is.  xiii.  3,  are  not  called  God's  sanctified  ones,  be- 
cause they  were  destinated  lo  be  sanctijied  for  that  work,  but 
because  they  were  so  prepared  for  it,  as  that  Ihey  were  actually 
separated  by  God's  word  for  the  accomplishment  of  such  work. 
But  our  adversaries  wilt  not  say  that  G<id  did  thus  sanctify  the 
Sabbath  in  paradise  by  his  word ;  and  yet  suppose  they  are  called 
tua  sanctified  ones  in  way  of  destination,  yet  there  is  not  the  liko 


lo  inteq>ret  it  bcre;  for  in  Is.  xiii.  3,  God  bimself  is 
brought  in  imraediatclv  speaking,  betiii'e  whuae  eternal  eyes  aH 
ibingj  to  come  are  as  prc-Menl,  ainl  heni;e  lie  iniglit  call  thera  his 
\  -saiiclified  ones ;  but  in  this  pluue  ol'  Deo.  ii.  2,  Sfosea  (nut  God 
I  innncdialely)  speaks  of  this  windifyiiig  in  wny  of  historicul  nar- 
'  rniioti  oiil}-.  Tiiis  destination,  whicli  is  stood  so  much  upon,  is 
I  but  a  mere  imaginaiion. 

'(  1 G6.     It  can  not  be  denied  but  that  it  is  a  u»nal  thing  in 
[  Scripture  to  set  down  things  in  way  of  pi-olcpitis  and  anticipation, 
u  they  call  it,  i.  e.,  U>  set  down  tilings  aforeliand  in  ilie  history 
which  many  years  happened  and  came  after  in  order  of  time ;  but 
there  is  no  such  (irolepsij  or  anticijiHtion  here,  (aa  our  adver- 
•aries  dream,)  so  that  whmi  God  is  siiid  to  sanciiiy  the  Sabbatb 
in  Genesis,  the  meaning  should  lie,  that  lliis  he  did  twenty-five 
bundred  years  after  the  creation,  for  litis  assertion  wants  all 
I  proofs  and  huih  no  other  prop  to  bear  it  up,  ihan  some  instances 
>  of  anticipations  in  other  places  of  Scriptui'c.     The  Jesuits,  from 
I   unwary  expressions  of  some  of  the  fathers,  tirsi  started 
answer,   whom   Gomarua   followed,  and   iifter    him   sundry 
Others  prelatically  minded  ;  but  Itivet,  Ames,  and  others  have 
acallered  this  mist  long  since,  and  theretbre  I  shall  leave  buMhis 
one  consideration  against  it,  vii^  that  throughout  all  the  Scrip- 
ture we  shall  not  6nd  one  prolep^^is,  but  that  the  history  is  evident 
and  apparently  false,  unless  we  do  acknowledge  a  prolepsis  and 
ftiitieipaiion  to  be  in  the  story ;  so  that  necessity  of  establishing 
tbu  truth  of  the  history  only  can  estahlish  the  truth  of  a  prolep- 
j   ais  in  the  history.     I  forbear  to  give  a  taste  thereof  by  any  par- 
[  t)''ular  instances,  but  leave  it  to  trial ;  but  in  this  place  idl^cd  of, 
(Gen.  ii.  2,)  can  any  say  that  the  elory  is  apparently  false  un- 
lesa  we  imagine  a  prolepfis !'  and  the  Sabbath  to  be  Srst  sanctified 
ta  Mount  Sinai,  (Bk.  xx.  ;)  for  might  not  (jiod  sanctify  )t  in 
paradiiie  as  soon  as  God's  rest,  the  cause  and  foundalioii'of  sanc- 
tifying of  it,  was  existing?    Will  any  suy,  with  Gomarus,  that  the 
Snbbaili  was  Uni  stiuciificd    (Ex.  xvi.)  because    God  blessed 
tb«m  so  much  the  day  before  with  manna,  wheoas  in  the  com-  - 
'  nwndment  ilMilf  (Ex.  xx.)  the  reason  of  it  is  plainly  set  down 
lo  be  God's  rusting  on  the  seventh  day,  and  Banciil'ying  uf  it 
I  fcmg  before? 

7%*m  167.     There  is  not  the  least  color  of  Scripture  to  make 

!   this  blessing  and  sanctifying  of  the  day  to  be  nothing  else  but 

Ood's  magnifying  and  liking  of  it  in  his  own  mind,  rejoicing  and 

ka  it  were  glorying  in  it,  when  he  had  rested  from  his  works; 

Bnd  yet  Sir.  Primrose  cu^ts  this  bloi-k  in  the  way  for  the  blind  to 

I  lUimbte  at,  supposing  that  there  should  be  no  such  anticipation  aa 

14  • 


fae  pleads  for ;  for  snrfly,  if  God  blef^sed  and  sanctilied  the  day, 
it  wa»  n  ri'al  and  an  eHiictual  sanctifl cation  and  blessing;  but  this 
tnagnifyint:  und  giorjing  in  il,  in  God's  rainJ.  is  no  real  ihing  in 
,  t)i«  blessed  Gud,  he  having  no  suuh  affections  in  him,  but  what 
I  is  Bftiil  Ui  be  in  liini  that  viaj  is  ever  by  some  special  effects,  the 
.  simple  and  pure  essence  of  God  admitting  no  affections,  per  mo- 
I  dum  t^rcliu,  Ktd  fffeclut,  as  is  truly  and  commonly  mainlaiiied. 
\       TTtetii  168.     If  God  sanctified  and  commanded  Adam  to  sane- 
I  tify  the  Sabbath,  it  was  either  that  he  himself  should  observe  it 
personally,  or  successively  in  his  posterity  also.    Now,  there  is  no 
reason  to  think  that  this  i^  a  command  peculiarly  binding  Adam 
himself  only,  there  being  the  same  cause  for  his  posterity  to  ob- 
serve a  Sabbath  as  himsi;lf  liad,  whicli  was  God's  example  of 
Iftbor  and  rest ;  and  if  this  was  given  to  his  posterity  also,  then  it 
was  a  moral  duty,  and  not  a  (mint  of  mere  order  proper  lo  Adam 
to  attend  unto;  yet  Kir.  Primrose,  for  fear  lest  he  should  liwot 
short,  in  one  of  his  answers,  wherein  he  tells  us  that  it  did  dero- 
gate much  from  the  excellency  of  Adam's  condition  to  liare  any 
one  day  for  God  appointed  unio  him,  yet  here,  notwithstanding, 
'    be  IflUs  us,  that  if  Gud  hud  appointed  such  a  dny,  it  was  no  moral 
thing,  nor  yet  a  ceremony  directing  to  Christ,  but  only  as  a  point 
of  order  which  God  was  pleased  then  to  subject  him  unto ;  and 
that  a  man  may  as  well  conclude  that  it  was  a  moral  thing  lo 
serve  God  in   Eden   becaui^e   it  was  a  place  which   God  hud 
appointed  Adam  lo  serve  him  in,  as  the  seventh  day  lo  be  moral 
'  biicause  it  was  the  time  thereof:  but  this  assertion  is  but  a  mere 
itifierof ;  for  the  text  l«Ua  us  expressly,  that  God  did  both 
I  bless  and  sanctify  the  seventh  day  in  a  special  manner,  as  a  thing 
of  common  concernment,  but  is  never  said  to  bless  and  sani^tifj 
the  place  of  Eden.     All  men  in  Adam  were  made  in  the  image 
of  God,  and  was  there  but  one  thing  in  innocenny  wherein  God 
made  himself  eminently  exemplary  in  labor  and  rest  ?  and  shall 
we  think  that  that  one  thing  was  rather  a  point  of  order  pi^per 
to  Adam,  than  a  part  of  God's  image  common  to  all  ?     The  b|i- 
pointment  of  that  royal  seat  of  Eden  was  nn  act  of  heavenly 
bounty,  and  therefore  might  well  be  proper  to  him  in  that  estate  ; 
but  the  appointment  of  the  time  for  God's  special  honor  whs  an 
act  of  justice,  made  and  built  upon  a  rule  of  common  equity,  as 
may  appear  out  of  the  second  edition  of  this  law  in  the  Iburth 
*  uommandment,  and  therefore  might  well  be  morally  binding  unto 
all,  and  not  a  point  of  mere  order  only  for  Adam  lo  obsune. 

jyifM  16<).  If  Adam  hud  mood,  all  mankind  might,  and 
perhaps  should,  have  iiU'crved  that  particular  seventh  day  Ibr- 
«vet  on  earth.     But  look, as  Adam  observed  it  not  merely  because 


tit  waa  that  seventh,  (a^  hnth  been  sliown.)  which  -wiu  but  second- 
uily,  aod  ns  il  were  arc iden tally  moral,  but  because  it  was  ibe 
seventh  day  appointed  of  Qod,  which  is  flrally  aod  primarily 
moral,  so,  although  we  now  Uo  not  observe  that  seventh  tlay 
which  Adam  did,  yet  the  substance  of  the  morality  of  this  cam- 
maud  given  unto  hitn  is  observed  ^till  hy  us,  in  observing  ihfl 
seventh  day  which  God  bath  appointed,  to  which  the  equity  of 
thiii  commaud  binds  generally  all  mankind ;  hence  therefore  it  is 
of  little  force  which  some  ulijecl,  that  if  the  commandment  to  man 
in  inuoceney  he  moral,  that  then  we  are  bound  to  observe  the 

taame  seventh  day  which  Adam  in  innocency  did.  This  is  oft  laid 
in  our  dUb ;  but  the  answer  is  easy  from  what  hath  been  said, 
'ntetU  170.  If  because  we  read  not  any  express  mention  ' 
that  tlie  patriarchs  Ix-fore  Muses'  time  did  sanctify  a  Sabbath, 
that  ihervfore  the  Sabbuih  was  not  eunctided  at  that  time,  we 
nay  as  wull  argue  that  it  was  not  observed  all  the  lime  of  the 
Jadgeis,  nor  of  the  hooks  of  Samuel,  because  no  express  men- 
tion is  made  in  those  books  of  any  such  thing;  for  if  it  be  said 
Ifaat  there  is  no  doubt  but  that  tbey  observed  it,  because  it  was 
published  on  Mount  Sinai,  the  like  we  may  my  concerning  the 
potriBPchnl  times,  who  had  such  a  famous  manifestion  of  God's 
mind  herein,  from  the  known  siory,  commandment,  and  example 
of  God  in  the  6r«t  creation.  (Geii.  ii.  2.)  It  is  not  said  express- 
ly ibat  Abram  kept  the  Sabbath,  but  he  is  commended  for  keep- 
iiig  God's  coiamandments,  (Gen.  zxvi.  3;)  and  is  not  the  S»b- 
buth  one  of  those  cummandmenis,  the  breach  of  which  is  ac- 
couiitcil  the  breaking  of  all?  {Ex.  xvi.  27.28;)  and  may  we 
bwfulty  and  charitably  think  that  Abram  neglected  other  mural 
duties,  because  they  are  not  expressly  mentioned  ?  Again :  it 
may  be  as  well  doubled  of,  whether  the  patriarchs  observed  any 
day  at  all.  (which  our  adversaries  confess  to  be  moral.)  because 
it  neither  is  expressly  mentioned.  Again:  it  may  be  said  with 
a*  Kood  reason,  that  the  riacriliees  wluch  they  offered  were 
without  warrant  from  God,  because  the  commandment  for  thern 
t*  not  pxpn'ssly  mentioned :  but  we  know  that  Abel  by  faith 
uffercil.  and  failh  must  arU«  from  a  precedent  word  ;  so  that,  as 
tlie  approved  practitie  of  holy  men  doib  necessarily  imply  a  coin- 
mnnJ,  so  iho  command  given  (as  hath  been  shown)  to  Adam 
dnth  as  nocvissarily  infer  a  practice.  Again  :  if  no  duties  to  God 
were  performed  hy  the  palriarcha,  but  such  as  are  expressly 
meniionct]  and  held  forth  in  their  examples,  we  should  then  be- 
huM  a  uran^  face  of  a  chunb  for  many  hundred  years  together, 
and  necessarily  condemn  the  generation  of  the  just  for  living 
in  groM  neglects  and  impieiicx,  there  being  many  singular  and 




lC-1  THE    UORALITY    OF    1 

Special  Julie*  wliich  doubtless  were  ilone  that  were  not  meet  par- 
tieuiarly  lu  be  menciuned  in  that  short  epilotne  of  above  two  thou- 
sand years  togellier,  in  llie  bool(  of  Genesis  i  and  therefore  for 
Mr.  Ironside  and  Primrose  to  conclude  tbat  Ibe  keeping  of  the 
Sabbath  had  certainly  been  mentioned  if  it  had  twen  observed, 
is  very  unsound,  llr.  Primrose  thinks  tliaf,  if  the  Sabbath  had 
been  observed,  it  Iiad  been  iIicd  mentioned,  because  lesser  tilings 
than  the  Sabbaih  are  made  mention  of,  there  being  also  i'reqaent 
occasion  to  sjieak  of  the  Sabbath,  and  that  Moses  and  the 
prophets  woiiltl  have  pressed  the  observation  of  it  from  the 
palriarelis'  example  if  thej  had  ao  practiced.  But  what  is  this 
kind  of  arguing  but  to  teach  the  Holy  Ghost  what,  and  when, 
and  how  lo  speak  ?  For  there  be  many  lesser  matters  expressed 
in  many  other  historical  parts  of  tbe  Scripture,  and  good  occa- 
sion as  man  may  fancy  to  speak  of  thij,  Sabbaih,  and  yet  we  see  it 
is  iinssed  by  in  silence.  But  it  is  no  wonder,  if  he  who  questions 
whether  there  were  any  days  of.  fasting  and  prayer  fur  two 
thousand  years  together,  because  ihey  arc  not  expressly  men- 
tioned, if  that  he  doubts  also  whether  there  were  any  Sabbath 
all  thai  time,  upon  the  same  ground.  But  can  any  question  that 
considers  the  sorrows  of  those  liiues,  which  all  ages  have  put 
men  to  seek  God  in  such  duties,  but  that  they  had  such  days  of 
fiisling,  as  well  as  their  betters  in  evangelical  limes,  when  the 
Bridegroom  was  gone  ? 

27iciit  171.  It  is  not  improbable  but  that  the  sacrifices  of 
Cain  and  Abel  (Gen.  iv.  3)  were  upon  the  Sabbaih  day,  Ibe 
usual  Elated  lime  then  for  such  services;  for  that  which  our 
translation  renders,  ''in  process  of  time,"  the  Hebrew  calls  it 
B'STi  in:,  i.  e.,  "  the  end  of  days ; "  and  why  may  not  this  be 
the  end  of  the  days  of  the  week,  (a  known  division  of  time,  and 
most  famous  from  the  beginning  of  tiie  world,  as  Bivet  demon- 
strates out  of  the  best  antiquaries,)  rather  than  at  the  end  of  the 
monibs  of  llie  year?  But  it  is  not  good  to  wrestle  with  prolm- 
hilities,  of  which  many  are  given,  which  do  ntthcr  darken  than 
clear  up  this  cause.  This  only  may  be  added,  ihal  suppose  the 
patriarchs  observed  no  Sabbath  from  man's  fall  to  Moses'  lime, 
yet  it  will  not  follow  that  man  in  innocency  was  a  stranger  to  it, 
because  man  in  his  apostasy  forgot,  or  did  not  regard  to  keep  it. 

TTietii  172.  If,  lliereforc,  it  was  a  duty  which  Adam  and  hia 
posterity  were  bound  to  keep  by  a  law  given  Ihem  in  innocency, 
(tjen  it  undeniably  follows  that  the  observance  of  a  Sabbath  doth 
not  depend  u[ion  great  numbers  of  people  to  sanctify  it;  for  at  first 
creation  the  number  was  hut  two,  and  yet  they  both  were  bound 
to  observe  it  then ;  nor  yet  is  it  to  be  cast  aside  through  any 

mftn's  freedom  from  worldly  eiicumbnuices,  whereliy  be  hath 
liberty  lo  serve  God  more  I'ruquently  evury  day;  Ibr  ilius  it  vrns 
Also  Id  the  slate  of  innoceiicy,  and  yet  the  Sabbath  to  be  observcil 
*;  is  therefore  unsound,  whicli  Mr.  Primrose  uflii-ms 
nz.,  That  tlie  consecration  of  a  certain  dny  for  GoA'i 
a  not  necessary,  but  then  only,  when  many  troop  to- 
gether and  make  up  tbe  body  of  a  great  assembly ;  and  that  tjiere- 
fore  it  may  be  doubted  whether  the  patriarchs,  having  but  small 
families  and  little  cumber,  observed  any  Sabbath,  but  rather 
served  God  alike  every  day  with  great  ease  and  ajuiduity  ; 
and  therefore  there  was  no  need  nor  cause  of  a  Sabbath  till 
they  became  a  numerous  people  at  Mount  Sin4i.  But  beside 
what  hath  been  said,  how  will  it  appear  that  the  posterity  of 
Seth,  called  the  sons  of  God,  (Gen.  vi.  1,  2.)  were  not  a  numer- 
ous people  ?  or  that  Abraham's  family  was  so  small,  out  of 
which  be  could  gather  three  hundred  fighting  men  to  pursue  five 
mighty  prinees  in  buttle  ?  But  suppose  they  were  few ;  yet  have 
not  small  eompanies,  and  pariieular  persons,  as  much  need  of  the 
blessing  of  a  Sabbalh,  and  special  communion  with  God  therein,  as 
great  numbers  aud  troops  of  people  ?  Is  not  the  observation  of 
the  Sabbath  built  upon  better  and  surer  grounds  mentioned  in 
the  Scripture  (ban  bigness  of  number,  and  freedom  from  cum- 
bers, not  mentioned  at  ^1  ? 

TTietit  173.  K  Adam's  fall  was  before  the  Sabbath,  {as  Mr. 
Broad  and  wmie  others,  otherwise  orthodox  in  this  point  of  the 
Stibbath,  conceive,  by  loo  much  inconsiderate  wresting  of  Ps, 
xlix.  12,  John  viii.  44,}  yet  it  will  not  hence  fallow  that  he  had 
no  such  command  in  innoeency  lo  observe  the  Sabbalh  before 
his  fall.  For  whether  man  had  fallen  or  no,  yet  the  thing  itself 
speaks  that  God  was  determined  to  work  six  days  in  making  the 
world,  and  to  rest  and  so  lo  sanctify  the  seventh,  that  he  might 
therein  be  exemplary  lo  man ;  and  consequently  God  would 
have  given  this  law,  and  it  should  have  been  a  rule  to  him 
whether  he  fell  or  no;  and  indeed  the  seventh  day's  rest  depends 
no  more  upon  man's  fall  than  the  six  days'  work  of  creation, 
whii^h  we  see  were  all  finished  before  the  fall ;  the  seventh  day's 
holiness  being  more  suitable  to  that  state  tlian  the  six  days' 
labor,  lo  whicli  we  see  he  wus  appointed,  if  God's  example  liad 
any  force  to  direct  and  lead  him  thereunto.  Agtuu :  if  the  law 
of  kibor  was  writ  upon  his  heart  before  he  was  actually  called 
forth  to  labor,  viz.,  to  dress  and  keep  the  garden,  (Gen.  ii.  15,) 
why  might  not  also  the  law  of  holy  rc^I  be  revealed  unto  him 
by  God,  and  so  anawerably  writ  upon  his  heart  before  he  fell. 
or  came  actually  to  rest  upon  tlie  Sabbalh  ?     Little  of  Adam's 

1G6  THE   MOBALITV   Of   THE   SAlitlATII. 

universal  obedience  lo  llio  law  of  wniks.was  ns  yet  actual  while 
lid  reinnincd  innocent ;  and  yei  all  liia  obedience  in  time  to  come 
was  writ  upon  liis  heart  ihu  fir^t  moment  of  his  crention  in  llie 
image  of  God,  as  it  were  nforchand ;  and  wliy  mipltt  not  this  law 
of  the  Sublinth  be  writ  eo  aforelitind  ?  AiiU  therefore  Mr.  Broad 
need  not  trouble  himself  or  olhers  in  inquiring  whether  God  sanc- 
tified tiie  Satibaili  tiefore  or  nfier  tlie  first  aeveotli  day  wliereia 
God  rested  ;  and  if  liefore  it,  bow  Adam  «>uld  know  uf  tiie  Sab- 
bath before  God'3  complete  rest  upon  the  first  seventh  day,  the 
cause  of  it.  For  God  was  as  well  able  to  make  Adam  privy 
to  Ills  counsel  aforehand  <»nceming  that  day,  before  God's  rest 
en  it,  which  was  a  motive  to  the  observance  of  it,  as  he  was  to 
acquaint  his  people  with  his  purpose  for  a  holy  passover  before 
the  occasion  of  it  fell  out.  Mr.  Broad  indeed  tells  us,  that  ii  is 
most  probable  that  God  did  not  bless  and  sanctify  the  first  Sab- 
bath or  seventh  day  of  recit,  because  it  is  not  said  that  God 
blessed  the  Sabbath  because  he  would,  but  because  be  had  rest- 
ed in  it ;  but  by  hb  leave  it  is  most  proper  to  say,  that  God 
ut  the  end  of  the  six  days'  work  bod  then  rested  from  all  iiis 
works ;  and  thence  God  is  said  to  sanctify  and  rest  the  seventh 
day;  bis  cessation  from  work,  which  is  the  natural  rest,  being  the 
cause  of  resting  the  seventh  day  with  a  holy  rest,  (as  we  have 
shown;)  and  therefore  there  is  no  reason  to  slay  till  the  seventh 
day  was  past,  and  then  to  sauclify  it  against  the  oext  seventh  day ; 
the  first  seventh  day,  upon  the  grouud  mentioned,  being  first 
sanctified,  and  which  Adam  might  be  well  enough  acquainted 
with  aforehand,  as  hath  been  shown. 

37ietii  174.  If  the  Scriptures  may  he  judge  of  the  time  of 
man's  fall,  (whii-h  yet  is  not  momentous  to  cast  the  balance  either 
way  in  this  controversy,)  it  will  he  found  that  neitlier  angeLs  nor 
men  did  fall  the  sixth  day  before  the  Sabbath ;  for  then  Grod 
looked  upon  all  his  works,  and  they  were  very  good,  (Gen.  i.  31,) 
and  tlierefore  could  not  as  yet  he  bad  and  evil  by  any  sin  or 
fall ;  and  now,  because  it  is  more  than  probable  that  if  Adnm 
liad  completely  sanctified  and  stood  one  Sabbath,  lie  had  stood 
immutably,  as  I  think  miglit  bo  demonstrated,  be  therefore  not 
standing  a  whole  seventh  day,  for  then  he  could  not  have  fallen, 
and  yet  not  being  fallen  the  sixth  day,  he  therefore  fell  upon  the 
Sabbath  day,  that  as  the  breach  of  every  other  commnod  was 
wrapped  up  in  that  first  sin,  so  tbis  of  the  Sabbath.  The  objec- 
tiona  against  this  from  John  viii.  44,  that  Satan  was  a  murderer  ' 
from  the  heginiirng,  and  from  Ps.  alix.  12,  thai  man  in  honor 
did  not  •\-^if,  or  abide  ooe  night  in  that  estate,  with  some  other 
coiyectural  reasons  taken  from  some  of  tlie  schoolmen's  obs  and 

Till;   Ml): 


Pnls,  are   easily  ansncreU  by  n  seriouB  mid  sober  mind;  and 
I  therefore  I  leave  llieui. 

T^etit  173.     Adujn's  soul,  !>»y  some,  did  not  need  a  Sabbalh, 
r  because  every  day  waa  a  Sablmlli  lo  liim  ;  nor  did  his  body  need 
r  it,  because  it  was  impassible,  say  some,  noi*  subject  lo  weariness 
in  its  work,  »ay  others  truly.     To  what  purjwse,  then,  shoulil 
i  kny  Sabbalh  be  appointed  uiiio  him   in  ihat  estate?     But  we 
I   must  know,  that  the  Hebrew  word  for  Sabbath  signifies  holy  ml, 
I  aiid'tlierefore,  as  Rivet  well  showti,  it  is  .called  rca,  not  nm:o, 
Matuekah,  whieh  signifies  common  rest  from  wearines!>;  henre 
it  follows,  that  the  Sabbalh  being  originally  sanctiHed  for  holy 
rest,  not  fur  common  rcat,  or  rest  from  natural  weariness  in 
labor,  Adam  iniglit  therefore  stand  in  need  of  a  Sabbath,  though 
bis  body  was  not  subject  to  any  weariness  in  or  &ii»r  his  labor- 
Hence,  also,  nlihough  he  was  to  live  holily  every  day,  yet  this 
liindera  not  but  that  his  soul  might  then  have  need  of  the  holy 
of  a  tjabbath.     For,  1.  Adam  was  to  serve  God  in  a  par* 
ticuliir  calling  then,  as  is  manifest  from  Gen.  ii.  15;  for  he  was 
iben  to  keep  and  drcsi  ihe  garden,  and  lo  act  with  and  under 
Cod  in  the  government  of  many  inferior  creatures.   (Gen.  i.  26.) 
'  And  thus,  his  time  being  filled  in  serving  God  with  all  holiness 
i  in  his  calling,  he  might  need  a  Sabbalh  i  nor  was  it  lawful  for 
him  to  turn  days  of  work  in  his  culling  into  days  of  rest,  and  so' 
to  keep  a  Sabbath  every  day,  no,  nut  in  iliat  innocent  and  happy 
etiote;  for  if  it  was  ctfntniry  lo  Adam's  holy  estate  to  work  six 
days,  how  eould  it  be  agreeable  or  suitable  to  tlie  holiness  of  God 
Ui  work  sis  days  ?     If  God  did  htbor  six  days,  and  resied  a  sev- 
tiith  without  any  need  of  a  rest  in  resgiect  of  any  weariness  in  his 
work,  why  might  not,  nay,  why  shonld  not,  man  imitate  and  bs 
like  In  his  God  in  latxir  and  rest,  although  he  was  not  subject  to 
any  weariness  in  his  holy  work  ?     2.  Though  every  day  was  to 
be  spent  in  holiness  mediately,  both  in  seeing  God  in  the  creti- 
(uree,  and  meeting  with  God  in  his  labor  and  calling,  yet  it  was 
Itot  unsuitable,  nay,  it  was  very  needful  in  that  e«liiie  to  havo  one 
day  in  the  week  for  more  immediate  and  special  converse  with 
I  trod,  and  for  God  mure  immediately  and  8[>ecially  lo  converge 
with  hiu.     Xur  indeed  Was  it  suitable  lo  God's  wisdom  to  con- 
fine man's  holiness,  cilher  then  or  now.  either  to  holy  labor  only, 
or  U)  holy  rest  only ;  for  then  he  should  not  have  been  so  like  unto 
Uod,  who  was  cxemplnrily  holy  unto  man  in  lioih.     Special  time. 
lor  action  wherein  he  closed  with  G(k1  mure  mediately  llirough' 
It  the  aix  days'  labor,  might  well  stand  with  special  time  Cor 
Kitemplaiion  of  God  upon  the  Sabbalh,  wherein  he  was  to  et^oy 
lOodmore  immediately.     Adam  did  not  need  a  Sabbath  upon  the 


same  ground  of  wcakneBs  thnt  we  do.  viz.,  because  we  can  not  be 
earnest  enough  (aa  Mr.  Primrose  objects)  in  holy  services  to 
God  upon  the  week  daya ;  but  we  see  it  did  not  suit  God's  wiitdora 
Dor  man's  holy  estate  then  to  be  intent  and  earnest  only  in  the 
enjoyment  of  his  rest,  to  which  his  inieniion  on  his  calling  and 
labor  then  could  not  be  any  liinderance  when  the  Sabbath  came  i 
being  free  from  such  clogs  of  sin  then,  an  we  are  now  pressed 
down  withal ;  and  therefore  it  is  on  unworthy  expression,  but  otl 
used  by  the  same  author  and  others,  viz.,  that  it  did  derogate 
from  the  excellency  of  Adam's  condition  to  observe  a  seventh 
day's  Sabbath,  and  that  the  determination  of  a  lime  then  did' 
argue  Adam's  inability,  or  want  of  inclination  and  atTcclion,  to 
serve  God  ordinarily,  and  that  the  observance  of  a  Sabbath  is  a 
mark  of  a  servile  condition,  (is  of  other  holy  days  under  tlie  law ; 
and  that  if  Adam  was  able  to  serve  Giod  continually,  that  it  was 
then  needless  to  limit  bim  to  a  particular  day ;  and  tliat  if  a  day 
were  needful,  Goil  would  have  left  the  choice  thereof  lo  his  own 
freedom,  considering  the  wisdom  and  godliness  wherewith  God 
had  endowed  him.  These  and  such  like  expressions  are  but  hay 
and  stubble,  which  the  light  of  the  truth  delivered  may  easily 

Tiesii  176.  It  is  true,  the  saints  and  angels  in  heaven  have 
no  set  Sabbalh  ;  but  doth  it  ihcrelbre  follow  that  the  state  of  in- 
noccncy  on  earth  should  have  been  in  all  tilings  like  (and  par- 
ticularly in  Ibis)  lo  the  slate  of  glory  in  heaven  ?  No  sudt 
matter ;  for  should  there  have  been  no  marriage,  no  dressing  of 
ibe  garden,  no  day  nor  night,  etc..  in  paradise,  because  there  is 
no  marriage,  nor  dressing  of  gardens,  nor  weeks,  nor  reckonings 
of  day  and  night,  in  heaven  ?  If  God  hath  work  for  Adam  to  do, 
not  only  upon  the  Sabbath,  but  upon  the  week  dnys  nbo,  why 
might  he  not  be  said  lo  glorify  God  without  stint  or  ceasing,  as 
the  angels  do  in  heaven?  unless  Mr.  Primrose  will  say,  that 
Adam's  marriage  and  dressing  the  garden  was  a  stinting  and 
ceasing  from  glorifying  God,  which  either  he  must  afflrm,  or  else 
_  his  argument  falls  Hat  upon  all  four,  who  thinks  that  Adam  could 
not  have  any  set  day  for  a  Sabbath,  because  then  he  should  not 
be  like  the  saints  and  angels  in  heaven,  who  glorify  God  con- 
tinually without  stint  or  ceasing. 

TTiegit  177.  They  fhat  think  that  the  Subbnth  was  not  given 
to  Adam,  because  it  was  given  as  a  peculiar  prerogative  and 
privilege  to  tlie  Jews,  and  ihey  that  think  that  it  was  the  Jews' 
prerogative  and  privilege  because  of  such  scriptures  as  atfirm 
that  God  gave  unto  (hem  his  Sabbaih,  (Ex.  xvi.  211 ;  Neh.  ix. 
14;  Ezek.  xx.   12.)  and  such  like,  they  may  as  well  imagine 

I  THE   JlORALITi;    Ol'  THE    OABUATII.  1 

tlist  neitlier  the  whole  dccnlogiiu  nor  any  pari  of  it  did  belong  to 
Adam,  because  the  very  same  thing  is  aflii-mGil  of  it,  viz.,  tliat  he 
give  his  laws  to  Jacob,  his  statutes  iind judgments  to  Israel.  (Ps. 
edvii.  10.)  To  them  aim,  il  is  said,  were  voramitted  the  oracles 
vf  God.  (Ilom.  iii.  2.)  The  Sabbath  llierefore  h  not  said  to  be 
^ven  to  them  as  a  peculiar  propriety  to  tlie  Jews,  no  more  than 
flther  parts  of  the  decalogue,  but  as  a  special  mercy,  yea,  as  a 
•weeler  mercy  in  some  respect  than  the  giving  of  any  other  laws, 
tt  U'-ing  the  sweetest  mercy  upon  earth  to  real  in  the  bosom  of 
God,  (which  the  law  of  the  Sabbath  calls  to,)  and  to  know  that 
it  is  our  heavenly  Father's  mind  that  we  should  do  so  ujwn  every 
Sabbath  day  in  a  special  manner,  without  the  knowledge  of 
which  law  we  have  less  light  of  nature  to  hold  the  candle  to  us 
lo  the  observance  of  it,  than  from  any  other  laws  to  direct  us  to 
^_l    Uie  obedience  of  them.  .^ 

^L  ?%«m  17S.  Il  is  alBnneil  (but  unwarily)  by  »ome,  that  the^ 
^^m  tree  of  life  in  paradise  was  a  type  of  Christ;  and  thence  some 
^^L  vould  infer,  that  it  was  not  unsuitable  lo  Adam's  estate  and  con- 
^^1  4iliuu  in  innoccncy  to  be  taught  by  types,  and  that  the  Sabbath 
^^M  ^glil  iherefure  be  ceremonial,  supposing  that  it  was  observed  by 
^H  Adam  in  his  innocent  estate ;  but  although  the  tree  of  life,  and 
^^P  Kindry  oilier  things  in  paradise,  arc  made  similitudes,  lo  set  forth 
^B,'  Christ  Je$us  in  his  church,  by  iIjc  H»ly  Ghost,  (Uev.  xxii.,)  yet 
^H  It  is  a  gross  mistake,  and  most  absurdttojuake  every  metajibor, 
^^K  or  similitude  and  allusion,  to  be  as^pej  for  the  husbandman 
^Haowiog  of  the  seed  is  a  similitude  dpre  aching  of  the  word, 
^V  (Matt,  liii.,)  and  yet  it  is  no  type  of  it ;  an  affectionate  lover  and 
^H  kosband  is,  in  sundry  scriptures,  a  similitude  and  resemblance 
^H  vf  Christ's  affection  and  love  to  his  church  and  spouse ;  the  head 
^H  ■nd  members  of  man's  body  are  similitudes  of  Christ  the  head, 
^B  ud  the  church  bis  members :  but  will  any  affirm  that  these  are 
^H  also  ty|>es  of  Cliriet  ?  And  just  thus  was  paradise  and  the  tree 
^M  «f  life  if]  it.  Tbey  were  simililudes  lo  which  the  Holy  Gbost 
^V  alludes  in  making  mention  of  Christ  and  his  church,  but  they  were 
^H  M  types  of  them ;  tlierc  was  lypiufietiu  in  them,  or  arbftrariut, 
^B  (which  is  all  one  with  a  similitude,)  but  there  was  no  lyptu  dt»- 
^B,  linatitt  therein,  being  never  purposely  ordained  to  shadow  out 
^B  Cbiist :  for  ibe  covenant  of  works,  by  which  Adam  was  to  live,  is 
^B-  directly  contrary  (o  the  covenant  of  grace  by  faith  iu  Christ, 

iRom.  xi.  6.)  by  which  wc  arc  to  live.  Christ  is  revealed  only 
^^  I  itie  covenant  of  grace,  and  therefore  could  not  be  so  revealed 
^M  to  tlie  covenant  of  works  directly  conlrary  thereunto.  Aduiu 
^V  tlicrcforc  was  not  capable  of  any  types  then  to  reveal  Christ  lu 
^B  fciin ;  of  whom  the  first  covenant  nui  not  speak,  aod  of  whom 
■  Vui..  ui. '  10 




,  Adam  slood  in  no  need  s  no.  not  so  much  as  to  confirm  him  in  lliat 
estate ;  for  (wiih  leave)  I  iliink  iliat.  look,  as  Adiim  breaking  the 
first  povL-nanl  by  sin,  he  is  become  immutably  evil  and  miserable 
in  himself,  according  to  llie  nilc  of  justice  in  that  covenant,  so 

I  suppose  him  to  have  kept  that  covenant,  all  his  posterity  had 
been  immutably  happy  and  holy,  (not  merely  by  grace,)  but  by 

I  the  same  equity  and  justice  of  thai  first  covenant;  and  henee  it 
follows,  thai  be  Blood  in  no  need  of  Christ,  or  any  revelation  of 
him  by  types ;  no,  not  to  confirm  him  in  that  covenant.  1  know,  in 
some  sense,  whatever  God  communicaies  to  his  creature  in  way 
of  justice  may  be  said  to  be  conveyed  in  a  way  of  grace,  if  grace 
he  taken  largely  for  that  which  is  conveyed  out  of  (jod's  free  will 
and  good  pleasure,  as  all  things  in  the  world  are,  even  to  the  ac- 
ceptance of  that  wherein  there  is  most  merit,  and  that  is  Christ's 
death  and  satisfaction  for  sin  :  bat_th[s  is  but  to  play  with  words ; 
for  it  is  clear  enough  by  the  apostle^verdict,  thatgrace"stnctly 
takeil  is  opposite  to  works,  (Rom.  ni.  6;)  the  law  of  works 
which  only  reveals  doing  and  life,  to  the  law  of  faith  which  only 
reveals  Christ  and  life ;  under  which  covenant  of  grace  Adam 
was  not,  and  therefore  had  no  types  then  to  shadow  out  Chritit. 
TjLSayjhai  paradise  and  the  tree  of  life  wej^.  tjp^  bj  yay  of 
an!ic^)aliorul[iisl-wme  lately  af!irm,)  is  as  much  as  to  say  that 
they  were  not  types  then ;  and  llierefore  neither  these  nor  the 
Sabbath  were  ceremonial  then,  and  that  is  euSicient  for  what  we 
aim  at;  only  it  is  observable,  that  this  unsound  expression  leads 
into  more  palpable  errors ;  for  as  they  make  the  tree  of  life 
typical  by  anticipation,  so  they  make  the  marriage  of  Adam  and 
Kvc,  and  consequently  the  marriage  of  all  mankind,  typical;  and 
then  why  should  not  all  marriages  cease,  when  Christ,  the  Anti- 

I  type,  is  come?  Nay,  they  make  the  rivers,  and  precious  stones, 
and  gold  in  paradise,  thus  typicalof  Christ  and  his  church,  (Rev. 
xxi.;)and  ihenwhymay  they  not  make'the  angels  in  heaven 
typical,  because  men  on  earth  who  pour  out  the  vials  are  re- 
sembled to  them  ?  And  why  may  not  men  riding  upon  while 
horses  be  typical,  because  Christ  is  so  resembled?  (Rev.  xix.  1 1.) 
Pererius,  who  collects  out  of  Hugo  de  Vict,  a  type  of  llie  whole 
.new  creation,  in  all  the  works  of  six  days'  first  creation,  may 
please  himself  (as  other  Popish  proctors  dol  with  such  like  shady 
speculations  and  phantasms,  and  so  bring  m  the  seventh  day  for 
company  to  be  typical  also ;  but  a  good  and  healthful  stomach 
should  be  exeueiling  fearful  of  a  little  feeding  on  such  windy 
meat  1  nor  do  1  think  that  Hugo's  new  creation  is  any  more  anli- 
typical  to  the  tirst  six  days"  creation  than  Damascene's  types  in 
the  fourth  commandment,  wha  makes  thou,  thy  son,  thy  daughter, 



TUE   UURALlTt    OP   TUtt   3AB&ATU. 


thy  Eervnni,  the  stranger,  to  be  types  of  our  sinful  afFecUons 
of  spirit,  and  the  oslinil  ihe  ass  ligures  of  (he  flesh  nnd  sensual 
part,  boih  whieh  he  saith  must  rest  upon  llie  Snbbnth  day. 

TXrm  179.  If  Ihertfore  the  Sabbath  was  given  to  Adam  in 
innocently  before  all  types,  nay,  before  the  lea^t  promise  of 
Chridf,  whom  Bueh  types  must  shadow  forth,  then  it  ean  not  be 
in  ite  first  and  native  institution  typical  and  ceremonial,  but 
ttionU  ;  and  therefore  in  its  first  and  original  institution,  of  which 
we  spt-nk,  it  did  not  lypily  either  our  rest  in  Christ  from  sin  in 
this  life,  or  our  rest  with  God  in  heaven  in  another  life,  or  any  , 
other  imagined  rest  which  man's  wit  can  easily  invent  and  invest 
the  Sabbath  wiifi.  But  look,  as  our  Saviour,  in  reforming  ihe 
abuses  in  marriage,  calls  us  to  the  first  institution,  so  to  know 
what  is  pcrjietual  in  the  Sabbath,  it  is  most  safe  to  have  recourse 
kilber,  which,  when  it  was  first  observed,  we  see  was  no  way 
typical,  but  moral ;  and  if  man  no  way  clogged  with  sin  and 
Mrth  had  ihen  need  of  a  Subhath,  haVe  not  we  much  more  ? 

Thetii  181).  As,  before  the  fall,  the  Sabbath  was  originally 
and  essentially  moral,  so  after  the  fall  it  became  accidentally  . 
typical :  i.  e.,  it  had  a  type  affixed  to  it,  though  of  its  own  nature 
it  m-ilb«r  was  nor  ia  any  type  at  all.  God  atHxed  a  farther  end 
unto  it  after  the  fall,  to  be  of  further  use  to  type  out  somewhat 
to  God*s  people,  while  in  the  substance  of  it  it  remaineth  moral ; 
and  hence  it  is  ttiat  a  seventh  day  remains  moral,  and  to  be  ob- 
served, but  not  that  seventh  day  which  was  formerly  kept ;  nor 
lisve  we  that  enil  of  resting  which  was  under  the  law,  but  this 
end  only,  [hat  we  might  more  immediately  and  specially  converse 
witli  Uod,  which  wus  the  miun  end  of  the  Sabbath's  rest  before 
man's  fall ;  for  if  the  Sabbath  had  been  essentially  typical,  then 
i(  should  be  abolished  wholly,  and  no  more  remembrance  of  it 
than  of  new  moons  anj  jubilees ;  but  because  it  was  for  substance 
moral,  being  extant  before  the  fall,  and  y<;t  had  a  type  af&xcd  to 
it  aflcr  the  liill,  hence  a  seventh  day  is  still  preserved,  but  that 
Mventh  day  is  now  abolished  ;  and  hence  new  moons  and  other 
JewiAli  festivals,  as  they  are  wholly  ceremonial  in  their  birth,  so 
tbey  are  wholly  abolished  (without  any  change  of  them  into  other 
days,  OS  this  of  the  Sabbath  i»)  in  their  very  being. 

Titttt  IHl.  There  are  sundry  scriptures  alleged  to  prove 
tJie  Sabbath  to  be  typitml  and  ceremoniiO,  out  of  the  Old  nnd 
New  TusUmeni,  as  Is.  Ixvt.  -23;  GaL  iv.  10;  Uom.  xiv.4,.0; 
Cot.  ii.  Ifi;  but  if  we  suppo.<e  tlmt  thc«e  phtces  be  meant  of  the 
weekly  Sabljaih,  (whicli  some  deny,)  and  rigiilly  urge  them,  we 
inay  quickly  pre.s$  bloud  instead  of  milk  out  uf  them,  and  wholly 
aboliaii  (aa  Wullwus  well  observes)  the  obKrvalion  of  any  Chris- 

172  THE    aiOltALITI    OF    JHE    SABBATH. 

tian  RabLaih  ;  bill  lliis  one  conBiileralion  of  a  type  affixed  to  it 
to  make  it  so  far  forth  ceremonial,  aiid  lliere'fore  alterable,  which 
for  subalnnce  ia  moral,  may  be  as  a  riglit  thread  to  lead  us  into 
a  way  of  truth  io  this  great  controt'eray,  and  to  untie  many  knota 
wliieh  I  see  not  how  poasibly  lliey  ean  be  otherwise  unloosed, 
and  therefore  we  may  safely  say  that  that  seventh  day  is  abol- 
ished, because  it  batb  a  type  affixed  to  it ;  but  that  a  seventh 
day's  Sabbath  is  still  continued  wherein  there  is  no  type  at  all. 

TTiesu  182.  If  any  say.  Why  was  now  the  ceremony  afRxed, 
washed  off",  and  removed  after  Christ's  coming,  and  so  thnt  sevoiith 
day  still  continued,  as  we  see  ))ublic  prayer  is  still  used,  but  tbe 
type  of  incense  removed,  and  tbe  first  bom  still  retain  that 
which  is  moral,  the  type  at^ed  to  them  being  now  abolished  ? 
the  reason  of  this  is,  because  there  ia  a  necessity  of  the  being 
of  both,  both  prayer  and  first  bom  ;  for  public  prayer  must  be, 
and  first  bom  must  be,  and  they  can  not  be  changed  into  any 
other  ;  but  there  was  no  necessity  of  the  continuance  of  thai  first 
seventh  day  to  be  the  Sabbath  ;  nay,  there  was  some  cause  to 
change  it,  and  another  day  might  be  our  Sabbath  as  well  as  that 
fii-st.  Look,  therefore,  as  the  Lord  coutd  have  kept  the  temple 
at  Jcrusidem  merely  as  a  plaoe  of  worship,  which  at  this  day  in 
the  general  is  necessary,  and  have  washed  and  wiped  off  tbe 
typical  use  of  it  in  respect  of  Christ,  yet  the  wisdom  of  tbe  Lord 
abolished  the  very  being  of  the  temple,  because  that  place  might 
be  as  well  changed  into  another,  and  lest  through  the  typicalnesa 
of  it  man's  corrupt  heart  should  abuse  it,  so  1  may  say,  concern- 
ing the  Sabbath,  it  did  not  suit  witJ)  the  wisdom  of  God  to  wipe 
off  the  ceremony  atfixed  to  that  seventh  day,  when  it  might  well 
be  changed,  and  so  kee]i  that  day,  considering  how  apt  men's  cer- 
emonious  and  superstitious  hearts  are  to  abuse  such  times  or 
places,  unless  the  very  types  be  abolished .vrith  the  things  them- 

Thcth  183.  It  is  true  the  Sabbath  is  called  a  sign  between 
God  and  us,  (Ex.  xxxi.  13;  Ezek.  xx.  20;)  but  it  doth  not  follow 
that  therefore  it  is  originally  significative  and  typical,  for  it  may 
be  only  accidenlully  so,  by  reason  of  a  type  and  sign  affixed ;  yet, 
upon  narrow  search  of  this  place  so  much  stood  upon,  no  type 
at  all  can  hence  be  proved,  because  a  sign  ia  mentioned  ;  for  it 
is  not  necessary  Io  think  that  It  is  a  typical  and  sacraoiental  sign, 
as  circumcision  and  the  passovcr  were ;  for  it  might  he  only  an 
indicant  sign  and  declarative,  (as  Num.  xvi.  36,  and  xvii.  10,) 
and  as  tbe  fruits  of  God's  regenerating  Spirit  are  signs  of  our 
translniion  from  death  to  life,  (I  John  iii.  14,)  which  signs  still 
continue ;  and  if  it  be  such  a  sign,  it  t>  rather  a  strong  arfuraent 


I  for  the  continuance  of  tUe  Sabbatb,  iban  for  any  abolition  or 
chan>re  lher«of. 

~"  r  184.  The  Sahbalh  beinp  no  visible  sign  of  invisilile 
1  KTace,  it  can  not  ihcrcrere  be  any  sacramental  sign,  or  typical; 
I  U  is  therefore  an  indicant  and  declarnlire  «ign  of  our  communion 
vilh  God,  and  God  willi  us,  of  our  interest  in  bim,  and  of  his  in 
is:  and  therefore  ui  those  places  (Es.  xxxi.  13. and  Ezek.  xx.  20) 
^  where  it  is  called  a  sign,  it  b  not  made  a  sign  simply  and  naked- 
'  ly  considered  in  itself,  (as  all  sucrameniul  and  typical  ei^ia 
I  be,)  but  it  is  so  called  in  respect  of  our  keeping  of  it,  or  as  it  is 
obeerTed  and  kept ;  and  therefore  it  runs  in  way  of  promise. 
(Ksek.  xs.  20.)  If  ye  hallow  ray  Sablmlbs,  tliey  shall  then  be 
a  sign  between  me  and  yon,  and  you  shall  know  (hereby)  that 
I  am  the  Lord  your  God  ;  and  although  the  Sabbath  itself  he 
called  a  sign,  (Ex.  xxxi.,)  yet  it  is  explained  (ver.  13)  to  be  such 
a  sign  as  to  know  hereby  that  the  Lord  our  God  sanctifies  ns, 
and  in  Ezek.  xx.  20,  that  we  may  know  hereby  that  he  is  the 
Iiord  our  God  ;  for  we  know  he  is  tlie  Lord  our  God  if  he 
isnclifies  us,  and  that  we  are  Ina  people  if  we  sanclify,  or  bo 
sanctified  of  him  ;  and  in  this  respect  it  becomes  not  only  a  sign, 
bat  a  rooluad  sign  between  God  and  us,  and  in  no  other  respect, 
{as  Walleeus  would  stretch  it;)  and  hence  it  is,  that  whoever 
makes  a  conscience  of  sanctifying  the  Sabhaih  aright,  shull  not 
long  want  assurance  of  God's  love,  hy  this  blessed  sign. 

Thetit  185.     What  ty|ie  should  be  afiixed  to  tbe   Sabbath, 
and  of  what  it  is  thns  typical  and  significative,  is  not  a  little  difH- 
,    eah  to  find  out,  and,  being  found  out,  to  prove  it  so  to  be.     In 
I   bundling  the  cban^  of  the  Sabbath,  I  shall  positively  set  down 
'  what  I  apprehend ;  only  at  the  present  il  may  not  be  amiss  to 
east  in  a  few  negatives  of  whnt  it  is  not ;  for  men's  wils  in  ima- 
gining types  ami  allegories  are  very  sinfully  luxuriant,  unleEs  God 
check  them  in  such  kind  of  divinity. 

Tieii*  186.     The  type  lies  not  in  the  day  of  worship,  for  the 

greatest  adversaries  of  the  Snbbaih  place  a  raornliiy  therein; 

nor  dolb  il  lie  in  a  seventh  day ;  for  though  seven  be  made  a 

Biunber  of  perfection,  jet  what  sober  mind  ever  made  a  tyiw 

I   of  Mven,  more  than  of  six  or  ten  ?     Some  have  made  the  week 

k  a  short  (.ummary,  and  epitome,  and  resemblance  of  (hat  old  propb- 

1  tey  of  the  world's  continuance  for  six  thousand  years,  (a  tliou stiiid 

I  years  being  with  God  but  as  one  day,)  and  ihe  seventh  thousand 

f  Ibe  great  day  of  rest  and  peace  to  the  weary  world  ;  but  this  is 

''  R  doubtful  assertion  at  best ;  or,  if  true,  yet  it  is  not  tbereforo 

I  properly  a  iyi>e  ;  or  if  it  be,  yet  not  sinh  a  type  as  wa.«  to  it^aso 

\_  U  the  coming  of  Christ,  (as  our  adversaries  would    have  the 






Sabbath.)  but  wliPn  the  antitype  is  come  of  (hat  seven  tbousand 
yenrs.  If,  ilicrdfore,  it  lies  any  where,  it  is  in  it  as  in  a  rest  day, 
or  day  of  rest. 

TTiait  187.  Some  make  the  re»t  of  tlie  Sikbbalh  a  type  of 
Clirist's  rest  in  the  |;ravei  and  if  it  could  be  proved,  I  durst  not 
oppose  it ;  but  it  ia  but  gratf»  dictnin,  affinned  by  Bome  go(!ly 
learned,  who  herein  symbolize  with  Popish  postillei's,  who  please 
tbeniselvea  rauch  in  this  and  such  like  allegorical  signifiijalions 
of  the  Subbatb'g  rtat.  For  if  Christ  did  ntilber  enter  into  the 
Blate  of  rest  till  his  resurrection,  nor^nto  the  place  of  rest  unlil  bia 
Bftcension,  how  then  could  the  re^t  of  the  Sitbbath  type  out  his 
rest  in  the  grave,  which  was  part  of  his  most  heavy  labor  of 
humiliation,  (Acts  ii.  24,)  and  no  part  of  bis  rest,  unless  it  was 
in  respect  of  cessation  therein  from  actions  of  natural  life  ?  But 
the  rest  of  one  day  is  very  unfit  to  resemble  and  type  out  the 
Pest  of  three  days  in  the  grave ;  and  whf  may  not  Christ's  real 
from  labor  in  bis  sleep  be  as  well  the  antitype  as  ChrL^t's  rest 
from  the  aelioits  of  this  life  in  his  grave  ? 

Thesis  188.  Why  may  not  our  labor  in  the  six  days  be  made 
a  type  of  our  laboring  in  sin,  as  well  aa  the  Sabbalh  a-tygie  of 
our  sancliUcation  and  rest  from  sin,  as  some  would  have  it? 
nVhy  may  nut  our  libertines  make  nbstinence  from  adultery, 
forbidden  in  the  seventh  command,  a  type  of  ouf  spiritual  chas- 
tity, (as  the  Gnostics  did  of  ohl,)  as  well  as  the  rest  from  labor 
on  (lie  Sabbath  a  type  of  our  veil  from  sin  ?  And  by  this  liberty, 
how  easy  is  it  for  frolhy  allegorizing  wits,  which  ray  heart  abliors, 
to  typify  (as  it  were)  and  allegorize  all  the  commandments  out 
■  of  the  world  1 

Thesis  189.  The  rest  on  the  Sabbath  may  be  considered 
either  in  respect  of  God's  example  in  himself,  or  his  command 
to  man  out  of  himself.  Now,  llio  rest  of  the  Sabbath,  as  it  is 
exemplary  in  God,  can  not  be  a  type  of  any  thiujj;,  because  God 
never  made  himself  an  example  of  any  ceremonial  thing.  God's 
own  immediate  nets  can  not,  without  much  injury  to  God,  be  made 
types  and  ceremonies ;  if,  therefore,  there  be  any  thing  of  llie 
rest  of  the  Sabbath  typiual,  it  is  so  in  refipcct  of  man's  rest  «n 
it,  commanded  nolo  him  of  God;  but  whether  and  what  it  doih 
typify,  we  shall  speak  to  in  its  proper  place. 

TTiesis  19(1.  There  wants  not  sufficient  proof  thai  the  Gen- 
tilna  generally  practiced  and  approved  a  seventh  dny's  Sabbalh, 
and  that  it  wiis  higlily  bonoied  among  them  as  very  gacicd. 
This  truth  both  Terlullian,  Eusebius,  Josephus,  and  Pliilo  have 
formerly  alBrmed.  Ai'ctus,  also,  especially  learned  Rivi?t,  have 
lately  vindicated  and  made  good  against  all  the  exceptions  of 


IJGomiirus  and  others,  insomiicb  as  lliat  the  last  refuge  both  of 
GomaruH  anil  Primrose  is  this,  viz.,  that  all  those  heathens  who 
wril  abuut  ihe  Salihaih,  and  in  honor  of  it,  rei.'elved  not  their 
light  from  DBilure,  but  from  the  wriiings  of  the  Jewish  common- 
wealth, all  those  heathenish  testimonies  abont  the  Sabbath  being 
published  and  writ  long  after  the  delivering  of  the  law  upon 

tUounl  Sinai.     And  therefore  they  think  this  no  argument  to 
|ffove  tlial  tliis  law  was  practiced  ever  einc«  the  world  began,  or 
ibnl  it  was  known  by  ibe  light  of  nature,  by  which  it  might  be 
evinced  to  be  momi ;  but  by  this  answer  we  shall  scarce  know 
any  thing  to  be  aci'ording  to  the  light  of  nature  by  the  writings 
of  the  heathens,  for  all  their  writings  are  since  Moses'  time,  if 
ihey  be  of  any  credit.     But  suppose  they  did  not  know  it  by  the 
working  power  of  the  light  of  nature,  yet  if  ihey  approved  of.  and 
honored  this  day  when  it  was  mode  known  by  other  means,  go 
that  they  knew  it  by  the  approving  light  of  nature,  as  the  authors 
alleged  ra&ke  gooil,  it  is  then  eutRcieat  lo  prove  the  seventh  day 
monil,  even  by  the  light  of  nature ;  and  nlthungh  Seneca  and 
some  others  nvSvA  at  the  Jewish  Sabbaths,  as  if  they  lost  the 
Bcvrnth  part  of  their  time  thereby,  yet  we  koow  that  men's  lusts 
will  give  them  leave  to  scoff  at  that  wbicli  yet  their  consciences 
^^  ofaaMiae  Ihcni  for ;  beiude,  I  think  those  eoofie  were  not  so  much 
^^L  at  the  seventh  day  as  at  their  strict  and  ceremonious  observance 
^^B  lliereufi-  at  aho  of  their  seventh  ycani,  wherein  it  is  no  wonder  if 
^V'.thBl  the  light  of  nature  should  not  so  dearly  see. 
^^        Thetis  I'Jl.     The  light  of  nature  in  the  Gentiles,  especially  in 
matters  of  the  first  table,  was  very  imperfect,  dim,  and  corrupt 
Ucnce  it  is  that  we  can  not  expect  to  find  any  jicrfect  light  of 
nature  in  matters  of  the  Sabbath.     Some  glimmerings  and  dark 
practices  hen-in  are  sutficient  to  pi\>ve  that  this  law  is  natitral, 
L  although  the  exact  proportion  of  time  for  rest  should  not,  or  could 
[  'aot,  by  any  reaMniiig  of  corrupt  nature,  be  perfectly  found  out. 
I'Tlicir  observation  of  holidays  and  feslivab  did  argue  some  im- 
^rfect  ligbt  of  nature  lu)\  concerning  the  Sabbath,  which  once 
'  nature  bad  luore  ]>erfectly,  as  old  walla  and  rubbiiih  do  argue  old 
L  and  great  buildings  in  former  times.     But  suppose  they  could  not 
J  And  out  vsaclly  the  spvonth  part  of  time,  and  so  dalicate  it  to 
l-iGod  for  his  Sabbath ;  yet  the  want  of  such  light  argues  only  the 
•  Want  of  perfection  of  the  light  of  nature,  which  we  should  not 
■  expect  to  find  iu  the  present  light  of  nuture  in  matters  of  the  first 
^telle.  and  in  this  of  the  Sabbath ;  and  therefore  it  is  no  ailment 
9  prove  the  Sabbaih  not  to  be  of  the  law  of  nature,  because  the 
'   perfect  knowledge  of  the  eiact  time  thereof  is  not  lefl  in  corrupt 
'    Ml*"*  now. 



TKflji's  102.  Siip|ii«elheG(inlile,iiliii  neiilicr  know,  nor  were 
eyer  reproved  [larlii-ularly  by  any  of  the  proplieis  for  bretiking 
the  Sabballi ;  yel  lUU  doih  not  ar<;iiB  ibiit  iliey  were  not  bound 
to  smiclily  a  Subbath,  and  that  it  was  iio  sin  fur  them  to  neglect 
llie  Rabtmlh ;  for  il  was  a  privilege  of  ibe  Jews  to  bave  God's 
oraclea  revealed  to  ihein,  and  especially  this  of  the  Sobbalh, 
(Neb.  ix.  14 1  liom.  iii.  2 ;)  so  it  was  a  curse  upon  the  Gentiles 
to  live  without  Christ,  uud  so  also  without  SabbaUis.  (Eph.  ii. 
12.)  The  times  of  which  ignorance  God  is  said  to  wink  at, 
(Acts  xvii.  30,)  iHrt  fay  excusing  them  for  the  breach  of  Sab- 
bath, or  other  sing,  but  by  not  reproving  thern  for  it,  as  neither 
he  did  for  many  other  moral  transjp-essions,  which  ootwithatand- 
ing  were  sins.  The  patriarchs  were  not  condemned  expressly 
till  Moses'  time  (by  Mr.  Primrose's  account)  for  their  polygamy, 
that  we  read  of,  and  yet  it  was  a  sin  all  that  time  against  the 
very  first  institution  of  marriage ;  and  why  might  not  the  breach 
of  the  Sabbath  be  a  sin  much  more  longer  among  the  Gentiles, 
and  yet  none  of  the  praphels  reprove  them  particularly  for  the 
same?  And  therefore  Mr.  Primrose  halli  no  cause  to  mark  this 
argument  with  chalk,  and  with  all  attention,  as  he  calls  it,  viz., 
that  the  breach  of  the  Sabbath  among  the  Gentiles  was  no  sin, 
because  it  was  not  any  where  particularly  reproved  by  the  proph- 
ets of  God ;  for  we  see,  by  what  liatb  been  said,  upon  what  weak 
crutches  it  standi. 

niesii  193.  The  Gentiles  shall  not  be  TOnde(nneil  only  for 
what  they  did  aclualiy  know,  and  did  not  prueiice,  but  also  for 
whut  they  did  not  actually  know,  yet  might  and  should  have 
known.  The  Gentiles  did  know  Uial  some  days  were  to  be  kept 
holy  to  God,  (saith  Mr.  Primrose.)  and  they  should  have  known 
the  fittest  proportion  and  most  suitable  freifuency  of  such  days, 
which  the  same  author  acknowledgeth  to  be  moral ;  therefore 
they  should  have  known  the  Beienili  day's  Sabbath,  and  possibly 
might  have  known  it  if  they  hod  not  held  truth  in  unrighteous- 
ness, but  made  improvement  hereof;  for  in  this  sense  hahrnti 
dabitur,  to  him  that  hulh  shajl  be  given,  to  wit,  more  of  the  same 
kind  of  light,  whether  natural,  moral,  or  evangelical ;  if  common 
light  ID  all  these,  more  common  light  i  if  special  light  in  them, 
they  shall  thou  have  more  special  and  saving  light. 

Thetis  194.  As  it  is  no  argument  that  that  law  is  according 
to  the  light  of  nature,  which  the  Gentiles  generally  practiced,  (for 
then  polytheism,  and  sacrificing  of  beasts.yea,  will  worship,  should 
be  according  to  the  light  of  nature,  because  these  sins  were  gen- 
erally practiced,)  so  it  is  no  argument  that  that  law  is  not  accord- 
ing to  the  light  of  nalqro  which  they  generally  neglected;  awl 



tliiTeforc  suppoiw  the  Genliles  nevi;r  obacrvcil  a  Subbatli,  yet 
ii  iiu  Hrgumciil  tiint  il  is  therefore  no  moral  law.  I  know 
Primrose  ihiiiks  tbat  the  sacrifices  were  by  an  instinct  of 
Biilure,  because  it  dictates  that  all  sias  wliereof  mortal  men  are 
guilij  are  to  be  expiated  by  sacrifices  and  ofierings  to  God  of- 
fended ;  which  assertion  hath  some  truth  in  it,  if  those  words, 
"by  sacrifices  and  offerings,"  be  left  ont ;  for  what  liglit  of  nature 
could  tnalce  men  think  that  an  infinite  Deily  offended  could  be 
pacifit:d  by  sucb  curnal  observanced  sa  the  sacrifices  of  Itrute 
beasts  and  their  blood,  which  never  offtinded  ?  This  custom  the 
Gentiles  migbl  retain  as  a  relic  of  former  instruction  and  in- 
sttluiion.  1^  their  first  fathers  after  the  flood  i  which,  tieing  mat- 
ters merely  ceremonious,  might  be  retained  more  firmly  than 
other  moral  duties  of  great  consequence.  However,  we  see  that 
the  practice  of  the  Gentiles  is  no  fit  guide  to  direct  that  wtiich  is 
according  to  the  law  and  light  of  nature.  , 

T%tti»  195.  If  more  narrow  inijuiry  be  made,  what  the  lawl 
of  nature  is,  these  distinctions  must  be  otiserved:  — 

1.  The  law  of  nature  is  either  of  pure  or  corrupt  nature.  ^ 

The  law  of  pure  nature  was  the  law  of  God  writ  on  Adam's 
heart  in  ionocency,  which  was  nothing  else  but  that  holy  bent  and 
indiuation  of  the  heart  within  to  act  according  lo  the  holy  law 
of  God  revealed,  or  covenant  made  with  him  without ;  and  thus 
Aquinas  places  the  law  of  nature  in  this  inclination. 

The  law  of  corrupt  nature  is  that  dim  light  left  in  the  mind, 
and  moral  inclination  left  in  the  will,  in  respect  of  some  things  , 
couuuned  in  the  Uw  of  God,  which  the  apostle  calls  conteitHce,  i 
(Kom.  ii.  ld()  which  natural  conscience  is  nothing  but  the  rem* 
DaDt*  and  general  principles  of  the  law  of  pure  nature,  left  in  all 
men  since  the  fall,  which  may  be  increased  by  more  knowledge  . 
of  the  hiir  of  God.  or  more  diminished  and  defaced  by  llie  widk- 1 
ednoM  of  man.  (Til.  i.  15.)  

d.  The  law  of  corrupt  nature  ia  token  either  more  largely  or 

Ai  it  is  taken  more  largely,  so  it  comprehends  all  that  which 
is  agreeable  and  suiiuhle  to  natural  reason,  and  that  from  a 
natur&l  innate  equity  in  the  thing,  when  it  is  made  known,  either 
by  divine  instruction  or  human  wii^dom,  although  it  be  not  im- 
ineiiiately  known  by  the  light  of  nature;  and  thus  numj  judiciid 
laws  are  natural  and  moral,  (though  pwilive,)  and  of  binding 
nature,  nnio  this  day. 

As  it  is  taken  tiriclly.  bo  it  comprehcmls  no  more  but  what 
nature  immediately  knows,  or  may  know,  wiihout  external  in- 
umction,  u  parenls  lo  be  honored,  man's  life  lo  be  preserved. 



178  TIIK   MOKALlTr   OF  TtlK   SAUEATW. 

3.  Tlie  luw  of  nature,  sirielly  iiiken,  are  eitlicr  principles  o 
nature,  or  coiu;lusi<»is  I'rom  sucb  principles. 

The  principks  of   Llie  law  of  uarure  are  in  some  respect*  -i 
man}',  yd  may  lie  reduced  to  thU  one  head,  viz. :  Tliat  good  is 
to  be  followed,  evil  to  l)e  avoided. 

Conclasions  are  deductions  from  ibose  priociples,  like  several 
streams  from  the  Game  spring,  which.  Lhough  less  evident  than 
the  principles,  yet  may  bo  readily  found  out  by  diacourse  and 
flad  Bcardi. 

4.  Conclusions  arising  from  these  principles  ore  more  imme- 
diate, or  mediate. 

Immediate  are  made  (by  Aquinas)  to  be  two:  1.  Love  God 
with  bU  Ihy  heart.     2.  Lore  thy  neighbor  as  thyself. 

Mediate  are  sueli  ns  arise  from  llie  former  prindples,  by 
means  of  those  (wo  more  immediate  conclusions:  'Ond  of  this 
,  kind  are  some^  (as  he  thinks,)  yea,  ail  the  taws  of  the  decalogue, 
if  right  reason  may  be  judge.     Now  to  apply  these. 

Tlietia  lOG.  If  the  question  be  whutlier  the  Sabbath  he 
known  by  the  light  of  pure  nature,  the  onswer  is,  yea;  for 
Adam's  mind  knew  of  ii,  and  his  heart  was  inclined  and  bent  to 
the  keeping  of  it,  although  it  be  true,  that  now  this  light  in 
corrupt  nature  (as  in  many  other  moral  duties)  is  almost  wholly 
extinct  and  worn  out,  as  hath  been  formerly  shown.  And.  to 
speak  plainly,  tliis  great  and  first  impression  left  on  mau's  heart 
in  pure  nature  is  [he  tirst  rule  according  to  which  we  are  now 
to  judge  of  what  is  tlie  law  of  nature  ;  and  it  servgs  to  dash  to 
pieces  nnd  grind  to  powder  and  dust,  most  eSectually  and  strongly, 
the  dreams  and  devices  of  such  as  would  make  lite  Sabbath  not 
moral,  because  not  natural,  or  not  easily  known  by  the  present 
light  of  corrupt  nature,  whenas  corrupt  nature  is  no  perfect 
copy,  but  a  blotted  discovery  of  some  part  of  the  light  of  nature, 
which  was  fully  imprinted  at  large  in  pure  nature:  and  there- 
fore it  is  no  wonder  if  our  adversaries  so  much  oppose  the 
commandment  of  the  Sabbath  in  the  state  of  innocency:  such 
therefore  as  are  otherwise  orthodox  in  (his  point,  and  yet  make 
this  description  of  the  law  of  nature  (viz.,  which  was  written  on 
man's  heart  in  his  first  creation)  (o  be  both  uncertain  and  imper- 
tinent, do  unwarily  pull  down  one  of  (ho  strongest  bulwarks. 
and  the  first  that  ever  God  made  lo  defend  the  morality  of  the 
Sabbath :  there  is  indeed  no  express  scripture  which  makes 
this  description  of  the  law  of  nature,  (us  ihcy  object,)  and  so  it  is 
of  many  other  things  which  are  virtually  awi  for  substance  con- 
tained in  the  Scripture,  although  iliere  be  no  formal  description 
Bet  down  of  tlie  same  ;  and  the  like  I  say  of  this  description  here. 


1  nwt  107.  If  we  speak  of  the  law  of  nature,  siriclly 
ikcn,  for  llini  irlikli  is  iintnedintelj  and  readily  knowji  by  iho 
'  common  light  of  nature  in  sll  meu,  then  it  may  be  ^ely 
affirmed,  thai  aitbough  the  Sabbath  should  not  be  in  this  sense 
natural,  yut  it  will  not  follow  lliut  it  is  not  therefore  moral ;  tor 
ihe  moral  law,  once  writ  on  man's  heart  in  pure  nature,  is  almost 
blotted  out;  only  some  rudera  and  old  rubbi:jh  is  letl  of  it  in  a 
perverse  mind  and  a  corrupt  heart,  (Eph.  It.  18.)  We  see  the  i 
wisest  of  the  heathens  mailing  those  tilings  to  be  moral  virtues 
(Junius  instanceth  in  th«  lavvol'  private  revenge,  and  we  know  they 
magnilii>d  will  worship)  which  the  Scripture  condemns  as  moral 
vii^es  and  sins:  God  would  have  commonwealths  preserved, 
in  all  places  of  the  world,  from  the  inundnLion  and  deluge  of 
nan's  wickedness,  and  therefore  he  hath  generally  printed  the 
notions  of  the  second  table  upon  men's  hearts,  to  set  bounds 
(as  by  eea  banks)  unto  the  overflowings  thereof,  and  hence  it  is 
that  they  are  generally  known :  but  he  would  not  have  churches 
every  where,  and  therefore  there  is  but  little  known  concerning 
matters  of  the  first  table,  and  consequently  about  this  law  of 
the  Sabbath,  which  nolwithsljinding  muy  be  moral,  although  it  be 
not  so  immf-dialely  made  known. 

TAtsit  198.  If  we  speak  of  the  law  of  corrupt  nature, 
hrgely  taken,  for  that  law  which,  when  it  is  made  known  by 
'  divine  determination  and  declaration,  is  both  suitable  and  congru- 
ous to  natural  reason  and  equity,  we  may  then  say  that  the  law 
of  the  Sabbath  is  according  to  the  light  of  nature,  even  of  cor- 
rupt nature  itself:  for  do  but  suppose  that  God  is  to  be  wor- 
shipped, and  then  tliese  three  things  appear  to  be  most  equal. 
1.  That  he  is  not  only  to  have  a  time,  hut  a  special  time,  and  a 
lit  proportiou  of  time,  for  worship.  2.  That  it  is  moat  meet  that 
he  should  make  this  proportion.  3.  The  Lord  having  given 
iiiMn  six  dnys,  and  taken  a  seventh  to  himself,  man's  reason 
can  nut  hut  confess  Ihnt  it  is  most  just  to  dedicate  that  time  to 
tiud  :  and  fur  my  own  part,  I  think  that  in  this  respect  the  law 
of  the  Sahbuth  was  a-t  fairly  writ  on  man's  heart  in  innocency 
as  many  other  moral  laws,  which  none  question  the  morality 
of  At  tills  day;  but  disputes  about  this  are  herein  perhaps 

netii  199.  The  sacrament  of  tha  Lonl's  supper  may  be 
■dmiitistered  (meet  circumstances  concurring)  every  Lord's  day  i 
nay,  ujion  the  week  duys  oRen, as  they  did  in  the  primitive  por- 
sRcations  ;  and  hence  our  Saviour  limits  on  time  lor  it,  in  the 
first  iftstiiutiotT  thereof,  as  he  did  for  the  passovet  ol'  old,  but 
only  thus :  "  At  oft  as  yva  do  it,  do  it  in  rciuemhroncv  of  me." 





Eeitce  it  will  follow,  tbat  now  under  ibe  gospel  lliere  'u  no  set 
Sabbalh  (as  M.  PviniroBe  would)  because  our  Saviour,  at  tbe 
first  iDstitutlon  of  tlio  Lord's  suppt^r,  liniils  no  pur[ii;ultir  day  for 
the  celi'bratiun  thereof,  at)  once  he  did  for  ihe  pa^suver;  for 
though  there  ia  aa  appointed  special  time  (as  liliall  liercafier 
appear)  for  the  public  ciiercide  of  all  lioly  duties,  not  being 
limited  to  those  times,  but  enlarged  to  other  linies  also,  hence 
there  is  no  reason  why  our  Saviour  ebould  institute  a  set  Sab- 
bath, when  he  instituted  the  Lord's  supper,  at  (he  proper  lime 
of  the  celebration  thereof,  a«  it  was  in  case  of  the  passovcr. 

Thetit  200.  It  is  no  argumenttoprovetbe  Sahbatblobecer- 
emonial,  beuaase  it  is  reckoned  umong  ceremonials,  viz.,  show- 
breud  and  saciifices,  as  M.  Primrose  und  Wallieus  urge  it  out  of 
Jilatt.  xii.  1-3 ;  for,  1.  U|>on  the  same  ground  fornicAtion  and 
eitiing  of  idolothjtes  are  ceremonial,  because  tliey  are  ranked 
among  ceremonials,  viz.,  bloud  and  things  strangled,  (Acta  xv. 
2tt.)  2.  Upon  this  ground  the  Sabbath  hath  no  morality  at  all  in 
it,  no  more  then  showbread  and  sucriiices,  which  were  wholly 
ceremonial.  3.  The  Sabbath  is  in  tbe  same  place  reckoned 
among  things  which  are  moral,  as  pulling  a  sheep  out  of  a  pit 
upon  the  Sabbath  day,  an  act  of  humanity ;  why  may  it  not 
then  be  as  well  accounted  moral?  4.  One  may  as  well  argue 
that  the  not  keeping  company  with  publicans  and  sinners  was  a 
ceremonial  thing,  because  the  Lord  Jesus  useth  the  same  pro- 
verbial speech,  "  I  will  have  mercy,  not  sacrifice."  {Matt.  ix.  13 ;) 
npon  which  he  defends  the  hiwl'ulness  of  pulling  the  ears  of 
corn  upon  the  Sabbath  day,  in  this,  Matt.  xii.  15:  the  scope 
therefore  of  this  place  is  not  to  show  the  nature  of  the  Sabbath 
day,  whether  it  be  ceremonial  or  moral,  but  the  lawfulness  and 
morality  of  his  act  in  eating  the  ears  of  corn  upon  this  day ;  and 
Uius  the  arguments  of  our  Saviour  are  very  strong  and  convict- 
ing to  prove  the  morality  of  such  an  act,  but  no  way  to  prove 
the  ceremoniality  of  the  Sabbath ;  for  that  is  ilic  scope  of  our 
Saviour,  that  mercy  lo  the  hungry  is  to  be  preferred  before  ihe 
sacritlce  of  bodily  resting  u[»oii  the  Subbalh.  M.  Primrose 
indeed  replies  hereto,  and  tells  us,  that  "mercy  is  to  be  preferred 
before  sacriUce  or  ceremonial  duties,  but  not  before  moral  duties, 
and  therefore  Christ  preferring  it  before  the  rest  on  the  Sabbatii, 
the  Sabbath  could  not  be  moral."  But  we  know  that  mercy  in 
the  second  table  is  someliraes  to  be  preferred  before  niovnl  duties 
in  the  first  table:  a  man  is  bound  to  neglect  solemn  prayer 
■ometimes  lo  attend  upon  llie  sick:  it  ia  a  moral  duty  to  sanctiiy 
some  day  for  a  Sabbalh,  (saith  M.  Primrose ;)  and  yet  suppose  a 
fire  be  kindled  in  a,  town  upon  that  day,  or  any  sick  lo  be  helped ; 

I  BtQst  not  mercy  be  preferred  beflire  hearing  the  word  ?    which 
•  himself  will  acknowlc'(lf;e  to  be  tlien  a  moral  duty. 

TTietU  201.  When  Christ  is  f^aid  to  be  Lord  of  the  Sabbath, 
(Malt.  xii.  8,)  the  meaning  is  not  aa  if  he  was  such  a  Lord  as 
had  power  to  break  it,  but  rather  such  a  Lord  as  had  power 
to  appoint  it,  and  consequently  to  order  the  wqrk  of  it  for 
liis  own  service.  &L  Primrose  thinks  "  that  he  is  said  to  be 
Lord  of  it  because  he  had  jjower  lo  dispense  with  the  keep- 
ing of  it,  by  whom  and  when  he  would  ;  and  that  Christ  did 
choose  to  do  such  works  upon  the  Sabbath  day,  which  were 
neither  works  of  mercy  nor  neceseiily,  nay,  which  were  servile, 
which  the  Liw  forbade ;  for  Christ,  (saith  he,)  as  Mediator,  liad 
no  power  to  dispense  with  things  moral,  bat  he  might  with 
mailers  ceremonial,  and  therefore  with  the  Sabbath."  How  far 
Christ  Jesus  might  and  may  dispense  with  moral  taws,  I  dispute 
not  now  i  I  think  Biell  comes  nearest  the  truth  in  this  controversy  j 
(miy  this  is  considerable  :  suppose  the  Sabbath  was  ceremonial; 
Tel  it  is  doubtful  whellier  Christ  Jesus,  who  came  in  the  days  of 
bia  llesh  u  fullill  alt  righteousness,  could  abolish  or  break  the 
law  ceremonial  until  his  death  was  post,  by  which  this  hand- 
writing of  ordinances  was  blotted  out,  (Col.  ii.  14,)  and  this 
middle  wall  of  partition  was  broken  down.  (Epfa.  ii.  14-16.) 
But  let  it  be  yielded -that  Christ  had  power  to  break  ceremonial 
bws  then  before  his  death,  yet  in  this  plitce  there  is  no  such 
mailer  ;  for  the  words  contain  a  clear  proof  for  the  right  obser- 
vaiiiw  of  the  Sabbath,  against  the  over-rigid  conceptions  of  the 
copcrslilious  and  proud  Pharisees,  who  aa  they  thought  it  un- 
lawful for  Christ  to  beat  the  sick  upon  tlie  Sabbath,  so  to  rub 
out,  and  eat  a  few  com  ears  upon  il,  although  hunger  and  want 

Sand  perhaps  more  than  ordinary  in  the  disciples  here)  should 
»ree  men  hereunio,  wtiich  was  no  servile  work,  (as  SI.  Primrose 
.)  but  a  work  of  necessity  and  mercy  in  thb  case ;  and  onr 
Saviour  proves  the  morality  of  it  from  the  example  of  David 
Mliug  the  showbread,  and  those  thai  were  with  him,  preferring 
tkai  aci  of  mercy  before  sacrifice,  and  obstinence  from  show- 
kread ;  and  hence  our  Sainour  argues,  ihat  if  they  attending 
anon  David  might  cat  the  showbread,  much  more  his  hungry 
I  4uciplcs  might  eut  ihe  com  while  they  atiended  upon  him  that 
s  Lord  of  the  Sabbath,  and  that  Ihey  might  be  the 
belter  Bireiiglhened  hereby  to  do  him  service :  these  things  being 
tun,  where  now  is  tliere  to  be  found  any  real  breach  of  the 
hbbath,  or  doing  of  any  servile  work,  or  maintenance  of  any  un- 
ary work,  which  the  same  learned  and  a^utc  writer  impulca 
P  our  Saviour  ?  which  I  had  almost  said  b  almost  blaiphemoDS. 

VOL.   111.  16 


182  THE   MORALITT   OF   THE    SAllBATH. 

Thetit  202.  It  is  no  argument  that  Ihe  Salib&tli  is  not  moral, 
because  it  is  suid  (Mnrk  ii.  27)  that  man  is  not  mailc  Tor  it,  but 
it  for  man  ;  for.  sailh  M.  Ironside,  man  ia  made  for  moral  duties, 
not  they  fur  man :  for  let  the  Sabbath  be  taken  for  the  bare 
rest  of  the  Sabbath,  as  the  Pharisees  did,  wbo  placed  so  mucli 
religion  Id  tlic  bare  rest  as  that  they  thought  it  unlawful  to  heal 
the  sick  on  that  day,  or  feed  llie  hungry ;  so  man  is  not  made  aa 
Ia£l1y,  for  ihe  bare  rest,  but  rather  it  for  man  and  for  his  good ; 
but  if  by  Sabbath  be  meant  the  aanciilication  of  that  rest,  so 
man  is  made  for  it,  by  Itl.  Primrose's  own  eoafession.  Now,  our 
Saviour  speaks  of  the  Sabbath  in  the  first  respect ;  for  the  rest 
of  it  is  but  a  means  to  a  further  and  a  better  end,  viz.,  the  true 
sancttficalion  of  it,  which  the  Pharisees  little  looked  unio ;  and 
therefore  he  might  well  say  tliat  the  Sabbath  was  made  for  man, 
the  rest  of  it  being  no  further  good  than  as  it  was  helpful  to  man 
in  duties  of  piety  or  mercy  required  of  man,  in  the  sanctification 
tliereoT.  M.  Primrose,  confessing  tlial  man  is  made  for  the  sanc- 
tification of  the  Sabbath,  would  llierefore  wind  out  from  litis,  by 
making  this  sanctification  on  the  Sabbath  to  be  no  more  than 
what  is  equally  required  of  man  all  the  week  beside:  but  he  is 
herein  also  much  mistaken ;  for  though  works  of  piety  and  mercy 
■re  required  every  day,  yet  they  are  required  wiib  a  certain 
eminency  and  specialty  upon  the  Sabbath  day,  and  thence  it  is 
that  God  calls  men  to  re^t from  all  worldly  occasions,  (which  lie 
doth  not  on  the  week  days,)  that  they  might  honor  God  in  spe- 
cial upon  the  Sabbath,  ns  shall  hereafter  appear. 

Thttit  203.  It  is  a  monkish  speculation  of  M.  Broad  to  dis- 
tinguish BO  of  the  Sabbath  in  unm  myttico  and  geniu  littrali,  as 
that  the  mystical  sense,  like  the  lean  and  ill-favored  kine  in  Pha- 
raoh's dream,  shall  eat  up  the  literal  sense,  and  devour  God's 
blessed  and  sweet  Sabbath ;  for  the  Lord  never  meant  by  the 
Sabbath  such  a  mystical  thing  as  the  resting  from  the  works  of 
the  old  man  only  every  day,  no  more  than,  when  he  commands 
us  to  labor  six  days,  he  permits  us  to  labor  in  the  works  of  the 
old  man  all  the  six  days. 

Tketii  204.  For  though  it  be  true  that  we  are  to  rest  every 
day  from  sin,  yet  it  will  not  hence  follow  that  every  day  is  to  be 
a  Christian's  Sabbath,  and  that  no  one  day  in  seven  is  to  be  set 
apart  for  iL  For,  1.  Upon  tlie  game  ground  Adam  should  have 
hud  no  Sabbath,  because  lie  was  to  rest  from  sin  every  day. 
2.  The  Jews  also,  before  Christ,  sliould  have  rejected  all  Sab- 
baths, because  they  were  then  bound  to  rest  from  ein  as  well  as 
Christians  now.  3.  Upon  the  same  ground  there  must  be  no 
days  of  fasting  or  feasting  under  Ihe  gospel,  because  we  are  to 


^H  Tim  MonALiTv  uF  nir.  saI'-bath.  183 

^v  fwl  from  sin  everj-Jny,  and  In  be  joyful  and  lliankful  every  dfiy. 
^V  I  know  eouiu  libertinee  of  late  eay  so  ;  but  upou  the  GBine 
™  gruuud  iherc  ehould  have  been  none  under  tlic  law  neither,  for 
Ihey  were  llien  buunti  as  well  as  wc  lo  faiit  from  sin.  4.  Hence 
neitiic-r  sliouli!  any  man  pay  his  debts.  becauGe  he  is  bound  to  be 
paying  bis  debt  of  love  lo  God  and  all  men  every  day.  5.  Ilenee 
also  DO  man  should  pray  at  any  time  in  hie  family,  nor  alone  by 
himself  solemnly,  because  a  Cliristiiin  is  bound  to  pray  continu- 
nlly.  And,  indeed,  I  did  not  think  ttiat  any  forehead  n>uld  I>c  so 
bold  and  brazen  as  to  make  sncb  a  conclusion.  But  while  I  was 
writing  this,  came  to  my  lietiring  concerning  a  seaman  who  came 
to  these  coasts  from  London,  miserably  deluded  with  princiiiles 
of  Familism,  who,  when  an  honest  New  English  man,  his  cabin 
le,  invited  him  lo  go  along  and  pray  together,  considering  their 
essiiies,  he  would  professedly  refuse  to  do  it,  upon  this 
ground,  viz.,  Dost  not  pray  continually 't  Why  then  should  we 
pray  together  now  ?  6.  The  commandment  of  the  Sabhaih  dolh 
SOI  therefore  press  us  to  rest  only  from  such  works  us  are  in 
themselves  evil,  which  God  allows  al  no  time ;  hut  from  the  works  . 
of  our  callings  and  weekly  cmploymcnU,  nbidi  are  in  them- 
■elves  lawful  and  of  necessity  to  be  attended  on  at  some  lime. 
It  is  therefore  a  loose  and  groundless  assertion  to  make  every  day 
'  under  the  gospel  to  be  a  Christian's  Sabhaih  daj~. 

Thetis  205.  To  think  that  the  Sabhaih  was  proper  to  the 
Jews,  becanse  they  only  were  able  to  keep  and  exactly  observe 
the  lima  of  it,  being  shut  up  (as  ]U.  Primrose  sailb)  within  a 
Utile  comer  of  the  earth,  and  that  the  Gentiles  therefore  are  not 
bound  lo  it,  because  they  can  noi  exactly  oliserve  the  time  of  it, 
in  icvcml  quarlfrs  of  Ilie  earth  so  for  distant,  is  a  very  fcehle 
tu^ument;  for  why  might  not  all  nations  exactly  observe  iho 
rising  and  setting  of  the  sun,  according  to  several  climates  hy 
vfaich  tlie  natural  day,  and  so  this  of  a  Sabbath,  is  exactly  meas- 
■red?  and  which  God  haih  appointed  (without  limitation  to  any 
hour)  lo  be  ihe  bounds  of  tlie  Sabbath  as  it  sooner  or  later  rises 
or  s«ls  ?  Were  not  the  mariners  of  the  men  of  Judali  bound  to 
'  observe  the  seventh  day  in  all  the  several  coasts  where  Ihey 
made  their  voyages  ?  Did  God  limit  lliem  lo  the  rising  or  Eelting 
■nn  of  Judea  only  ?  What  color  is  there  to  think  thus  of  theiu  ? 
Indeed,  it  is  true  that,  in  some  habitable  northern  coasts,  the  sun 
it  not  out  of  sight  some  months  logelber ;  but  yet  this  is  cerlain, 
if  they  know  huw  the  year  spends  into  months,  they  can  exactly 
reckon  the  weeks  of  those  months,  and  ibereibre  can  exacily  IcU 
Tou  the  days  uf  wbich  those  weeks  consi.'^t,  and  lliercfore  llicy 
uve  their  exact  rules  and  menauret  to  know  east  and  west,  the 

place  of  the  sunri^ing  and  eun^^etting,  and  conseqiientljr  to  know 
the  Saliliatli  dajrs;  uud  yet,  if  tbey  Bhonld  not  exactly  know  it, 
their  will  to  do  it  is  herein  (as  in  other  tilings)  accepted  of  God> 

TKuii  20C.  If  this  truth  concerning  the  morulily  of  the 
Sabbath  did  depend  upon  the  leBttmony  of  ancient  writers,  it 
were  easy  to  bring  them  up  here  in  ihe  rear,  not wiihafnnding  the 
flourishes  of  the  great  historian :  but  this  haih  been  done  suffi- 
ciently by  others,  nor  doth  it  suit  our  scope  who  nim  nt  only  the 
clearing  up  of  the  meaning  of  the  fourth  command,  whicli  roust 
stand  firm ;  the  heaven  and  earth  shall  fall  asunder ;  the  Lord 
will  rnlher  waste  kingdoms,  and  the  whole  Christian  world,  with 
fire  and  swoE^,  than  let  one  tittle  of  his  law  perish ;  the  land 
must  rest  when  God's  Sabbiitha  can  not,  (Lev.  xxvi.  3'!  ;)  and 
although  I  wish  the  ministry  of  Christ  Jeeus  a  L'oniely  and  com- 
fbrlable  maintenance,  as  may  richly  testify  his  people's  abundant 
tliunkfulnesB  for  the  feet  of  those  his  messengers  as  preacii 
peace,  ret  melhinks  it  argues  great  blindness  in  those  men  who 
plead  for  a  morality  in  u  tenth  pig,  or  sheaf  of  com,  and  yet 
will  acknowledge  no  morality  in  a  seventh  day. 

T^etit  207.  I  shall  therefore  conclude  and  shut  up  these 
things  with  answer  to  M.  Carpenter's  and  Heylin's  ii-giixa,  an 
argimient  against  the  Siibbatli,  which  they  have  gone  compassing 
the  whole  earth  and  heavens  about  to  find  out,  never  heard  of 
ml  their  days,  and  now  it  is  brought  to  light.  I  would  not  make 
inirth  with  it,  (as  some  have  done,  and  left  the  scruple  untouched,) 
but  in  words  of  sobriety,  and  seriousness,  and  plainness.  If  the 
Sabbath,  or  Lord's  day,  (say  they,)  be  moral,  then  the  moral  law 
is  subject  lo  manifold  mutalion,  because  the  nations  issuing  out 
of  Noah's  ark  spread  themselves  from  thence  over  the  face  of 
the  whole  earth,  some  farlher,  some  at  a  shorter  distance,  where- 
by, changing  the  longitude  with  their  habitation,  they  must  of 
necessity  alter  the  differences  of  times ;  neither  can  any  exactly 
and  precisely  observe  any  one  day,  either  as  it  was  appointed  by 
Hoses,  or  as  it  was  instituted  by  Christ's  apostles  afterward,  by 
reason  of  the  manifold  transportation  of  colonies,  and  transmi- 
gration of  nations,  from  one  region  into  another,  whereby  the 
timea  must  necessarily  be  supposed  lo  vary,  "tho  answer  is 
ready  and  easy,  viz. :  Although  the  nations  issued  out  of  Noah's 
ark,  and  spread  themselves  over  the  face  of  Ihe  whole  earth, 
tome  farther,  some  at  a  shorter  distance,  and  thereby  changing 
their  longitude,  altered  the  dilFerences  of  time,  some  beginning 
the  day  sooner,  some  later,  yet  they  might  observe  Ihu  same 
day ;  for  the  day  is  regulated  and  measured  by  the  sun,  and  the 
sua  comes  to  one  meridian  sooner  or  later  than  to  onolher,  and 

'Itenre  Ihe  day  begins  in  one  place  sooner  or  Inter  than  in  another, 
~  so  the  beginuing  of  the  liaj  is  (respeclively)  variccl,  but  yet 
Ae  day  itdelf  remains  unuliangeably  the  same  :  what  lliough  our 
Muiilrymen  in  Old  England  begin  their  Sabbath  above  foar 
hours  before  us  in  New,  they  beginning  at  tlieir  evening,  we  at 
r  evening ;  yet  bolb  may  and  tlo  observe  the  same  day :  alt 
nalions  are  bound  to  keep  holy  a  seventh  part  of  time  ;  but  that 
time  must  be  regulated  by  the  sun,  neither  is  it  necessary  that 
Ae^ame  individual  twenty-fonr  hours  should  be  observed  by  all, 
but  the  liame  day  as  it  is  measured  by  the  sun  in  this  or  that 
place,  which  may  be^n  in  places  more  easterly  many  hours 
sooner  than  in  other  places  more  westerly ;  a  day  is  not  prop- 
erly time,  bm  a  measure  of  time,  and  therefore  the  manif<^ld 
transportation  of  colonies,  and  transmigration  of  nations,  from 
Me  region  unto  another,  hinder  not  nt  all,  but  that  they  mny  ex- 
■ctly  and  precisely  observe  the  same  day,  which  was  instituted 
■nd  appointed ;  for  although  the  time  of  the  beginning  of  the 
day  be  varied,  yet  the  day  itself  is  not,  can  not  be  varied  or 

Now,  whereas  they  say,  that  if  any  man  should  travel  tbe 
world  about,  a  whole  day  must  needs  be  varied,  and  if  two  men 
from  the  same  place  travel,  the  one  eastward,  the  other  west- 
ward, round  about  the  earth,  and  meet  in  the  same  place  again, 
.0Ky  Htiall  find  that  he  who  hath  gone  eastward  hath  gotten,  and 
ihe  other  going  westward  hath  lost,  a  day  in  their  account ;  yea, 
'ttie  Hollanders,  after  their  du^oovery  of  Prelum  de  Mayre, 
coming  home  to  their  country,  found,  by  comparing  their  ac- 
counts with  their  countrymen  at  home,  tliat  they  had  lost  a  day, 
^viug  gone  westward,  and  so  compassed  the  earth  round.  I 
aniwer,  what  though  a  Inivelor  varying  perpetually  tbe  quantity 
|«f  lite  day,  by  reason  of  his  continual  moving  with  or  against  the 
Mn's  ranlion,  in  time  get  or  lose  a  day  in  his  account ;  is  tbe  day, 
dKi^forc,  of  its  own  nature  variable  or  cluingeable?  God  hath 
plkcud  the  sun  in  the  Krinameol,  and  appointed  it  for  times  and 
MOHons,  and  in  ^t>ccial  for  the  regulating  of  the  day ;  and  as  the 
■notion  of  the  sun  is  constant,  so  there  is  an  ordinary  and  constant 
Hiccession  of  days  without  variation  ;  lor  unless  tbe  sun's  course 

»be  changed,  tbe  day  which  is  regulated  by  it  is  not  cliangod. 
Kow,  if  any  shall  travel  round  about  the  world,  and  so  anticipate 
«r  second  the  diurnal  motion  of  the  sun,  and  thereby  varying 
continually  thu  quantity  of  the  day,  at  length  gain  or  lose  a  day, 
According  to  tlieir  reckoning,  they  may  and  ought  then  to  correct 
their  accounts.  Gregory  XIII.,  having  found  the  Julian  year  to 
be  loo  grvU  for  tbe  motion  of  tba  sun,  cut  off  ten  days,  by  wtiioh 


186  THE    MORALITV    OF    THE    SABBATH. 

the  equinoxea  and  solEtices  hnd  anticipated  their  proper  places, 
(hat  go  the  year  might  be  kept  at  Its  riglit  periods  ;  and  ta  it  not 
ftS  good  reason  that  a  traveler  who,  oppoaing  the  sun's  diurnal 
course,  contiiiunUy  shortens  somewhat  of  his  day,  till  at  Ust  in 
compaseing  the  earlh  round  he  gains  a  irhole  daj,  should  cut  off 
ia  his  fucounts  thai  day  wliii-h  he  hath  gained  by  anticipating  the 
Ban's  course,  and  so  rectify  liis  account  of  the  day  ?  For  in  every 
tvgion  and  counlry  whai?oever,  and  howsoerer  situate,  as  men 
■re  to  begin  the  day  at  ihnt  time  whca  ttie  day  naturally  begins 
ib  that  place,  so  likewise  ihey  are  to  reckon  and  count  the  days 
U  tliey  ore  there  regulated  and  ordered  by  the  sun,  and  that 
should  be  the  first  or  second  day  of  the  week  to  them  which  is 
nalurally  the  first  or  second  day  of  the  week  lo  that  place  where 
they  are;  and  thus  their  doubts  arc  easily  salisfied  when  they 
return  to  the  ])lace  whence  Ihey  first  came.  But  if  any  shall  say, 
it  is  very  difficult  for  men  thus  lo  rectify  their  accounts,  and  lo 
observe  that  time  in  every  place  which  was  at  first  instituted, 
and  it  is  probable  that  the  nations  in  their  several  transmi- 
grations and  transportations  never  used  any  such  course,  the 
answer  is  obvious :  men's  weakness,  or  neglect  and  carelessness  to 
do  what  they  ought,  ia  not  a  suflicient  argument  to  prove  that  not 
to  be  their  duty ;  l>esideg,  it  is  not  probable  that  any  nations  were 
thus  put  to  it  to  travel  round  about  the  whole  earth,  (although 
some  particular  persons  in  this  later  age  have  sailed  round  about 
it,)  and  therefore  could  not  vary  a  whole  day  possibly ;  but  going 
Bome  eastward,  some  westward,  some  southward,  some  northward, 
they  spread  themselves  over  the  face  of  the  whole  earth,  some  at 
A  shorter,  some  at  a  farther  distance,  and  so  some  began  the  day 
sooner,  some  later,  and  yet  all  (as  hath  been  shown)  might  ob- 
serve the  same  day.  The  morality  of  the  Sabbath  is  not  built 
Vpon  astronomical  or  geometrical  principles,  and  therefore  it  can 
not  fall  by  any  shady  speculations  so  far-fetched. 


7^«(  1.  Tub  cljangc  o[  this  day  from  iho  last  (o  the  iii^t 
if  ihe  week,  altliough  it  be  confirmed  by  an  ancient  custom,  jet 
the  true  reason  and  grounds  of  so  great  a  change  are  not  so  fully 
knowD,  Bscred  writings  not  k>  expressly  setting  down  (as  it  doth 
in  some  things  of  less  concernment)  the  causes  hereof.  And 
many  of  the  argumenU  heaped  up  and  multiplied  by  some  for 
tlio  change  of  it,  which  may  seem  of  rery  great  weight,  while 
they  want  an  adversary  at  the  other  end  of  the  scale  lo  balance 
them :  yet  upon  sod  examination  and  search  into  them,  they 
prove  loo  light,  and  consequently  occasion  the  tempialion  of 
scrupling  the  truth  and  Talidity  of  others  more  clear.  We  are 
therefore  wiih  more  wariness  and  humility  of  mind  to  search 
into  this  comroverey,  and  with  much  thankfulness  and. modesty 
to  accept  that  little  light  which*  God  gircs  us  in  greater,  as  well 
ns  of  much  light  nhidi  he  is  pleased  to  lend  us  in  smaller  mai- 
lers. PmcimaT  operlii,  exerceraur  obtcurii,  was  his  speech  loiig 
bince  concerning  the  Scriptures,  There  is  no  truth  so  clear  but 
man's  loose  wit  can  invent  and  mint  many  pernicious  caviU 
agitinst  it;  and  therefore  in  those  things  which  f^hine  forth  with 
less  evidence,  it  is  no  wonder  if  it  ca^ts  such  blots  and  stains 
ofion  ibem  as  lliftt  they  can  scarcely  be  discerned,  yH  magit 
inimieam  ttrilatt,  acumine  nimio.  We  should  therefore  bo  wise 
with  sobriety,  and  remember  that  in  this  and  such  like  contro- 
versies, the  Scriptures  were  not  written  to  answer  all  the  scru< 
plea  and  objections  of  cavilers,  but  to  satisfy  and  stablish  the 
consciences  of  poor  believers.  And  verily,  when  I  meet  with 
»uch  like  speeches  and  objections  as  these,  viz..  Where  is  it  ex- 
pressly Kud  that  the  old  Subbalh  is  abrogated?  and  what  one 
scripture  is  there  in  the  New  TesUment  decbring  expressly  that 
the  Lord's  day  is  substituted  and  put  in  its  room  'f  1  can  not  from 
such  expressions  but  think  and  fear  that  the  ignorance  uf  this 


change  in  some  doth  not  Bgiriiig  so  much  from  defiuienej  and 
wiint  of  light  on  God's  pari,  but  nwlier  from  perverseness  on 
man's  pari,  which  will  not  see  nor  own  the  truth,  because  it  is 
not  revenled  and  disjiensed  after  that  mannei'  and  lashion  of 
CApre^^ion  as  man's  wit  and  fantasy  would  hnre  it.  Like 
Nuainan,  who,  because  llie  prophet  went  not  about  the  cure  of 
bis  IcpnH'j'  in  thnt  way  and  fashion  which  he  vrould  have  bim, 
did  not  thi^refore  (for  a  time)  see  that  way  of  cure  which  God 
Itud  revealed  to  bim.  For  the  Holy  Ghost  is  not  bound  to  wiite 
all  the  prineiples  of  religion  umler  commonplace  hcadii,  nor  to 
«iy  expressly.  In  ihia  place  of  Scripture  you  may  see  the  old 
8abbaih  abrogated,  and  the  new  ineiituted  ;  tor  we  find  no  such 
kind  of  expressions  concerning  Paul's  epi^tle^,  and  many  bookd 
nf  Scripture,  that  this  or  that  epistle  or  book  is  canonical,  whicli 
yet  we  know  to  be  so  by  other  evidences.  We  know,  also,  that 
the  Holy  Ghost,  by  brief  hints  of  truth,  gives  occasion  of  largo 
oomnicnts,  and  by  writing  about  other  matters  tajigiiam  aliud 
agtnt.  it  brings  forth  lo  light,  by  the  by,  rcvel^on»  of  great  con- 
,  corument,  which  it  saw  meet  purposely  in  that  maniier  to  make 
known.  And  as  in  many  other  things  it  hutb  thuH  done,  so  es- 
pecially in  this  of  the  Sabbath.  So  that  if  our  hearts,  like  locks, 
were  fitted  to  God's  key,  they  would  be  soon  opened  to  see 
thoroughly  the  difficulties  of  this  point :  which  I  confess,  of  all 
practical  points,  hath  been  most  full  of  knots  and  difiiculties  to 
my  own  weakness. 

T^mit  %  To  make  apostolical  unwritten  Inspirations,  notified 
ftnd  made  known  in  their  days  to  the  churches,  to  be  the  cause 
of  the  change  of  the  day,  is  lo  plow  with  a  Popish  heifer,  ami 
to  cost  that  anchor  on  which  deceivers  use  to  rely,  and  by  which 
thoy  hope  lo  save  themselves  when  they  know  not  how  other- 
wbc  to  defend  their  falsehoods. 

77ie*it  3.  To  make  ecclesiastical  custom,  established  lirst  by 
the  imperial  law  of  Conslanline,  to  be  the  foundation  of  the 
ehange,  is  to  make  a  prop  for  prelacy,  and  a  step  to  Popery,  and 
to  open  A  gap  to  all  human  inventions.  For  if  it  be  in  the  church's 
power  to  appoint  the  greatest  holy  day,  why  may  not  any  other 
rile  and  ceremony  bo  imposed  al^o  ?  And  if  it  be  free  lo  observe 
this  day  or  not,  in  respect  of  itself,  because  it  wants  a  divine 
institulioii,  and  yet  necessary  to  observe  it,  in  respect  of  the 
ehurch's  custom  and  constitution,  (as  some  pretend.)  why  may 
not  the  church's  commandment  be  a  rule  of  obedience  in  a 
thousand  things  ehie  as  well  as  in  this?  and  so  introduce  will 
wurvhip,  and  to  ^erve  God  afier  the  tradition  of  men,  which  God 


Theii*  4.  The  observation  of  the  first  day  of  the  week  for 
the  Clirislifui  S»bbath  ariselb  from  the  force  of  the  foiirtli  com' 
maiidmenl,  as  Btrongl/  as  the  observation  of  the  media  cultia, 
or  means  of  worship,  now  under  the  New  Testament,  doth  from 
the  force  of  the  second  commnndment ;  only  let  this  be  supposed, 
that  the  day  is  now  changed,  (as  we  sliall  hereafter  prove,)  as 
also  that  the  worship  itself  is  changed  by  divine  institution ;  for 
gospel  institutions,  when  the/  be  appointed  by  divine  sovereign 
authority,  yet  ihey  may  then  be  observed  and  practiced  by  virtue 
of  some  moral  law.  The  gospel  appointed  new  sacraments,  but 
we  are  to  use  them  by  virtue  of  tlie  second  commnnduient ;  so 
heru  the  gospel  appoints  a  new  seventh  day  for  the  Sabbath,  but 
it  Htands  by  virtue  of  the  fourth  commandment,  and  therefore  the 
olwervalion  of  it  is  not  an  act  of  Christian  liberty,  but  of  Clirig- 
ti;in  duty,  imposed  by  divine  authority,  and  by  virtue  of  the 
moral  law. 

neiit  5.  For.  the  morality  of  the  fourth  commandment  (as 
liaih  been  proved)  being  preserved  in  observing  not  that  Sabbuth 
only,  nor  yet  a  Sabbath  merely  when  man  sees  meet,  but  in  ob- 
serving llie  Sabbath,  i.  e.,  such  a  Sabbuth  as  is  determined  and 
apininted  of  God,  (which  may  therefore  be  cither  the  lirsi  or  lost 
si'  tlie  seven  dayt,)  hence  it  is,  that  the  first  of  the  seven,  if  it  be 
determined  and  instituted  of  God  under  the  New  Testament, 
Hn»ctb  e(]ually  from  the  fourth  commandment,  as  the  last  sevenili 
day  did  under  the  Old  Testament ;  and  tlierefore  it  is  no  such 
piaruiam,  nor  deluiion  of  the  common  people,  as  Mr.  Brabourn 
would  make  it,  to  put  the  title  of  the  Lord's  Sabbath  upon  the 
Lord's  day,  and  to  call  it  the  Subbatb  day  ;  for  if  it  be  bom  out 
of  the  same  womb  the  first  seventh  waa,  il"  it  arise  (I  mean)  from 
the  same  commandment,  "  liemembcr  to  keep  holy  tbe  Sabbath 
day."  why  may  it  not  bear  the  name  of  the  Sitbbuih  now,  as  Iho 
lirijt  bom  did  in  former  times  ? 

Theiit  6.  If  tbe  Lord  would  have  man  to  work  eix  days 
together,  according  to  his  own  example,  and  the  morality  of  the 
fourth  commandment,  that  so  a  seventh  day  determined  by  him- 
self might  be  observed,  hence  il  is  tliat  neitlier  two  Sabbaths  in  a 
week  can  stand  with  the  morality  of  the  fourth  commandment,  nor 
yet  could  the  former  Sabbaih  be  justly  changed  iulo  any  other 
lUv  tluui  into  the  first  day  of  the  week ;  the  first  day  could  not 
belong  to  the  week  before,  for  then  there  should  be  eiglit  daya 
in  a  week,  and  if  il  did  belong  to  the  week  following,  then  (if  we 
suppow  that  tlie  second  had  l>een  the  Sabbuth)  there  must  be 
one  working  day,  vix.,  the  first  day  to  go  before  it,  and  five  work- 
ing dayi  BKer  il,  and  so  there  should  not  uur  cuuld  not  be  six 

working  days  continued  logelLer,  that  Ihe  sevenlli  might  b 
Lord's,  according  lo  ihe  inoralily  of  the  fourth  commandment. 
And  hence  it  is,  that  no  human  or  ecclesiastical  power  cau  change 
llie  Sabbath  lo  what  day  of  the  week  thej  please,  from  the  first, 

7K«m  7.  It  should  not  seem  an  uncouth  phrase,  or  a  hard 
saying,  lo  call  the  first  day  of  the  week  a  seventh,  or  the  serenth  ' 
day ;  for  though  U  be  the  first  absolutely  in  order  of  existence 
from  the  creation,  yet  relatively  in  way  of  relation,  and  in  respect 
of  the  number  of  seven  in  a  week,  it  may  he  invested  with  the 
name  and  title  of  a  seventh,  even  of  such  a  seventh  aa  may  law- 
fully be  crowned  and  anointed  to  be  the  Sabbath  day;  for  look, 
as  Noah,  though  he  waa  the  first  in  order  of  years,  and  dignilj 
of  entrance  into  the  ark,  yet  he  is  called  the  eighth,  (2  Pet  ii.  5,) 
in  that  he  was  one  of  them  (as  the  learned  observe)  qui  oelona- 
rium  nuntentm  perjiciebani,  or  who  made  up  the  number  of  eight; 
so  it  is  in  res])ect  of  the  first  day,  which  in  divers  respects  may 
be  cnlled  the  first,  and  yet  the  seventh  also.  Mr.  Braboum's 
argument  therefore  is  of  no  solidiry,  who  goes  about  to  prove  the 
Christian  Sabbath  to  be  no  Sabbath,  because  "that  Sabbath 
which  the  foui-th  commandment  enjoins  is  called  the  seventh 
day ; "  but  all  the  evangelbts  call  the  Lord's  day  the  first  day  of 
the  week,  not  the  seventh  day.  For  he  should  remember  that  the 
same  day  in  divers  respects  may  be  called  the  first  day,  and  yet 
the  seventh  day  ;  for  in  respect  of  its  natural  existence  and  be- 
ing, it  may  be  and  is  called  the  lirst  day,  and  yet  in  respect  of 
divine  use  and  application,  it  may  be  and  Is  called  Ihe  seventh 
day,  even  by  virtue  of  the  fourth  commandment,  which  is  the 
I.ord's  day,  which  is  confessed  to  be  the  first  day. 

Thttit  8.  For  although  in  tmmtro  numerarUe,  (as  they  call 
it,)  i.  e.,  in  number  numbering,  there  can  be  but  one  seventh, 
which  immediately  follows  the  number  six,  yet  in  nuinero  Hu?n«- 
ralv,  i.  e.,  in  number  numbered,  or  in  things  which  are  numbered, 
(as  are  tbe  days  of  the  week,)  any  of  the  seven  may  be  so  in  way 
of  relation  and  proportion.  As,  suppose  seven  men  stand  to- 
gether ;  take  the  last  man  in  order  from  the  other  six,  who  stand 
about  him,  and  he  is  the  seventli ;  so  again,  take  the  first  in  order, 
and  set  him  apart  from  the  six  who  stand  below  him,  and  if  the 
number  of  them  who  are  taken  from  him  make  up  the  number  of 
six,  he  then  may  and  must  necessarily  be  called  the  seventh. 
Just  thus  it  is  in  the  days  of  the  week ;  the  first  Sabbath  irom 
the  creation  might  be  called  the  seventh  day  in  respect  of  the  six 
days  before  it;  and  ibis  first  day  of  the  week  may  be  called  the 
HVenth  day  also,  in  respect  of  the  six  working  days  together  aflw 

JTUE   CIUKUK    OF   Tll^   SABHAIU.  191 

It  That  may  be  callc<)  the  last  seventli,  this  ihc  BrsI  seventlt, 
without  anv  absurdity  of  account,  which  some  would  iinagioe  ; 
Md  if  this  first  day  ol'  the  week  is  called  (hu  eighth  day,  iiecord- 
iag  to  Ezekii.'re  prophecy  of  evangelical  tiroes,  and  lib  reckoning 
onward  from  the  creniJon,  (Eeek.  xliii.  27.)  why  may  it  not  then 
in  other  respects  put  on  the  name  of  a  seventh  day  also? 

The$it  9.  The  reason  why  the  Ix>rd  should  depose  the  last 
•erenlh,  iuid  exali  and  crown  the  first  of  seven  to  be  the  day  of 
the  Christian  Sabbath,  is  not  go  well  considered,  and  therefore 
to  be  here  narrowly  examined.  For  as  for  thofe  eastern  Chrix- 
tions,  who,  in  the  primitive  limes,  oliscrved  two  Sabbaths  in  a 
week,  the  Jewish  and  tiie  Christian,  doubtless  their  milk  sod  over, 
icd  Uieir  seal  went  beyond  the  rule.  The  number  of  Jew§  who 
were  bebevers,  and  yet,  too,  too  zealous  of  their  old  customs,  we 
know  did  fill  those  places  in  their  dispersion,  and  before  more  than 
llie  western  and  more  r«moie  parts,  and  therefore  they  might  more 
powerfully  iofect  those  io  the  east;  and  they,  to  giunu- keep  them, 
'  night  more  readily  comply  with  them.  Let  us  dierefore  see 
bto  the  reasons  of  ihb  change  from  one  seventh  onto  another. 

Thrtit  10.  The  good  wiU  of  Him  who  is  Lord  of  the  Sab- 
Mlb,  is  the  first  ellicienl  and  primary  cause  of  the  institution  of  a 
WW  Sabbath ;  but  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  bein|;  upon  the  first 
3>y  of  the  week,  (Mark  xvi.  9,)  is  the  secondary,  moral,  or  moving 
•Skuse  hereof:  the  day  of  Christ's  resurrection  being  Cbrisl's 
Joyful  day  for  his  people's  deliverance,  and  the  world's  restitution 
d  new  creation,  it  ia  no  wonder  if  the  Lord  Christ  appoint  it, 
d  the  apostles  preach  and  publish  it,  and  the  primitive  Chris- 
tians observe  it  as  their  holy  and  joyful  day  of  rest  and  consola- 
lioo.  For  some  notable  work  of  God  upon  A  day  being  ever  tbe 
"al  cause  of  sanctifying  ihe  day.  hence  the  work  of  redemp- 
tion being  finished  upon  the  day  of  Christ's  resurrection,  and  it 
rlieiiig  ihu  most  glorious  work  that  ever  was,  and  wherein  Christ 
was  first  most  gloriously  manifeiiled  to  have  rested  from  it,  (Kom. 
i  4,)  hence  the  Lord  Christ  might  have  good  cause  to  honor  this 
day  above  all  others ;  and  what  other  cause  there  should  be  uf 
tite  public  solemn  assemblies  in  the  primitive  churches,  upon  the 
fint  tiny  in  the  week,  than  this  glorious  work  of  Cbrisl's  resur- 
rection upon  the  same  day  which  began  their  great  joy  fur  the 
rising  of  tlie  Sun  of  Righteousness,  is  scarce  imaginable. 

Thai*  11.     No  action  of  Christ  dotb  of  itself  sanctify  any  time : 

tor  if  it  did,  why  should  we  not  then  keep  as  many  holy  days 

•very  year  as  we  find  holy  actions  of  Christ  recordcil  in  Scriji- 

:,  as  the  superstitious  crew  of  blind  Papists  do  at  this  day? 

.  if  Go<l,  who  is  ihe  Lord  of  time,  shall  sanctify  any  such  day 

or  time  iftierein  ittiy  such  ttrrlion  is  done,  such  a  daj  then  is  to  be 
kepi  holy ;  and  therefore  if  the  will  of  God  hath  sanctified  the 
day  of  Christ's  resurrection,  we  may  lawfully  sanctify  ibe  same 
day  ;  and  therefore  Mr.  Braboum  doth  us  wrong,  as  if  we  made 
the  resurrection  of  Christ  merely  to  be  the  cause  of  the  change 
of  this  day. 

netit  12.  Why  the  will  of  God  should  honor  the  day  of 
Christ's  resurrection  aa  holy,  rather  than  any  other  day  of  his 
incarnation,  birth,  passion,  ascension  :  It  is  this;  because  Christ's 
rising  day  was  his  resting  or  Sabbath  day,  wherein  he  first 
entered  into  his  rest,  and  whereon  his  rest  began.  For  the  Sab- 
bath, or  rest  day,  of  the  Lord  our  God,  only  can  be  our  rest  day, 
according  to  the  fourth  commandment.  Hence  the  day  of  God's 
rest  from  the  work  of  creation,  and  the  day  of  Christ's  rest  from 
the  work  of  i^edemplion,  are  only  fit  and  capable  of  being  our 
Subbntlis.  Now,  the  Lord  Christ,  in  the  day  of  his  incarnation 
and  birth,  did  not  enier  into  his  rest,  but  rather  made  entrance 
into  his  labor  and  sorrow,  who  then  began  the  work  of  humilia- 
tion, (Gal.  ir.  4,  5 ;)  and  in  the  day  of  his  passion,  he  was  then 
under  the  sorest  part  and  feeling  of  his  labor,  in  bitter  agonies* 
upon  the  cross  and  in  the  garden.  And  hence  it  ia  that  none  of 
those  days  were  consecrated  to  be  our  Sabbath,  or  rest  days, 
which  were  days  of  Christ's  labor  and  sorrow  j  nor  could  the 
day  of  liis  ascension  be  fit  to  be  made  our  Sabbath,  because, 
although  Christ  then  and  thereby  entered  into  his  place  of  rest, 
(the  third  heavens,)  yet  did  he  not  then  make  his  first  entrance 
into  his  estate  of  rest,  which  was  in  the  day  of  his  resurrection ; 
the  wisdom  and  will  of  God  did  therefore  choose  this  day  above 
any  other  to  be  the  Sabbath  day. 

7%«m  13.  Those  that  go  about  (as  some  of  late  have  done) 
to  make  Christ's  ascension  day  the  ground  of  our  Sabbalh  day, 
had  need  be  fearful  lest  they  lose  the  truth  and  go  beyond  it, 
while  they  aiTecl  some  new  discoveries  of  it,  which  seems  to  be 
the  case  here.  For  though  Christ  at  his  ascension  entered  into 
his  place  of  rest,  yet  the  place  is  but  an  accidental  thing  to 
Christ's  rest  itself,  the  stale  of  which  was  began  in  the  day  of  his 
resurrection ;  and  therefore  there  is  no  reason  to  prefer  that 
which  is  but  accidental  above  that  which  is  most  aubstwlial ;  or 
the  day  of  entrance  into  the  place  of  his  rest  in  bis  asceni>ion 
before  the  day  of  rest  in  his  resurrection  ;  beside,  it  is  very  un- 
certain whether  Christ  ascended  upon  the  first  day  of  the  week; 
wo  are  certain  that  he  arose  then ;  and  why  we  should  build  such 
a  vast  change  upon  »u  uncerlainly  I  know  not.  And  yet  sup- 
pose that,  by  deduction  and  strength  of  wit,  it  might  be  found  out, 

■  TUt  ov  Titi:  sabdatu.  193 

■  jet  we  see  not  llie  lialj  (ihoat  expressly  setting  it  down,  vis., 
KtltBt  Christ  ascended  upon  ilie  drst  day  of  tlie  week,  which,  if 
I -ke  had  iDtended  to  have  mode  the  ground  of  our  Cbristiiwi  Sab- 
■Mth,  be  would  surely  have  done  ;  the  lii^t  dttj  in  the  week-being 
■ever  accounted  llio  Lord's  day  in  Holy  Scriptures ;  and  no 
I  wber  first  day  do  wo  find  mentioned  on  which  be  ascended,  but 
K«tily  on  that  day  wherein  he  aro»  from  the  dead. 

K  7%Mt«  II.  And  took,  OS  Christ  waa  a  Lumb  slain  from  the 
rnundotion  of  the  world  raerlloriously,  but  not  aclutilly,  so  he 
I'iraa  also  risen  again  in  the  like  manner  from  the  fouudntion  of 
Vthe  world  meritoriously,  but  not  aciuully.     Hence  it  is,  llmt  look, 

■  H  God  the  Father  actually  instituted  no  Sabbalh  day,  until  he 
I  Iwd  actually  (tni^lied  bid  work  of  creation,  so  neither  was  it  meet 
r  Had  thjij  d»y  should  be  changed  until  Christ  Jeaus  had  actually 
W  Aniitheil  (and  not  meritoriously  only)  the  work  of  redemption  or 
I  Kllorslion ;  and  hence  it  is  that  the  cburuh.  before  Christ's 
I  floming,  night  have  good  reason  (o  sanclity  that  day,  which  was 
L  {natiluted  upon  the  actual  finishing  of  the  work  of  creation,  and 

■  yet  miglit  have  do  reason  lo  observe  our  Christian  Sabbath  ;  the 
1  Work  of  restoration  and  new  creation,  and  rest  from  it.  Dot 
rbeiag  Ihcti  so  much  as  actually  begun.  _^ 

■  Thetit  15.  Whether  our  Saviour  appointed  that  first  indi-t 
Bgidaal  day  of  hie  resurrection  to  be  the  first  Christian  Sabbath  \ 
^Ht  Bomewntu  ditBcult  lo  determine ;  and  1  would  not  tie  knots, 
Kind  leave  them  for  others  to  unloose.  This  only  I  aim  at :  that  J 
B|d>lu>ugh  the  first  individual  day  of  Christ's  resurrection  should 
E')MH  pusHibly  be  the  first  individual  Sabbath,  yet  still  the  resur- 
I  nciion  of  Christ  is  the  ground  of  the  institution  of  the  !jabbath, 

■  which  one  consideration  dosheth  all  those  devices  of  some  men's 
m  Jwnds,  who  puzzle  their  readers  with  many  intricacies  and  dilfi- 
I  mIiios,  in  showing  that  the  first  day  of  Christ's  resurrection  could 
I  MI  he  the  first  Sabbath,  and  tbeuce  would  infer  that  the  day  of 
I  bis  resurrection  was  not  the  ground  of  the  institution  of  the 
W,  Sal>l>atb,  which  inference  is  roost  fuUe ;  for  it  was  easy  with 
I  Christ  to  make  that  great  work  on  this  day  to  be  the  ground  of 
I  ttc  institution  of  it,  some  time  aller  that  work  was  past. 

I  n«*it  16.  The  sin  and  fall  of  man  having  defaced  and 
I  Ipoitad  (tie  jure,  though  not  de  fuclo)  the  whole  work  of  crea- 
I  tiwi,  as  the  learned  Bishop  Lake  well  observes,  it  was  nut  so 
I  Beet  thcrefure  that  the  Sabbath  should  be  ever  kept  in  respect 
I  tt  tliat  work,  but  rather  in  respect  of  this  new  creation  or  resto- 
l<Mion  uf  all  things  by  Christ,  after  the  actual  accomplishment 
k>ti>fr(!«f  in  the  day  of  his  resurrection.  But  look,  as  God  the 
ll^ather  having  created  the  world  in  six  days,  he  rested  therefore 
\         voi»  III.  17 

194  THK   CHA.NGK   OF   THK   SAttBAtll. 

and  EanttiSed  the  seventh,  so  this  work  being  spoiled  and 
marred  by  man's  sin.  and  ihe  new  creation  being  finished  and 
ended,  the  Lord  thcrefoi-u  rested  ibe  first  day  of  the  week,  and 
therefore  Mini;lifii.-d  ii. 

TJieiii  17.  The  fourth  coniniandmeut  gives  in  the  reasoti 
why  God  Banctilied  the  sevenih  day  from  ihe  creation,  viz, : 
bei^use  God  rested  on  that  day,  and,  as  it  is  in  Ex.  xizi.  17, 
was  refnished  in  it,  that  ia,  took  a  complacency  and  delight  in 
bis  work  so  done  and  so  finished.  But  the  sin  of  man  in  falling 
from  his  first  creation  made  God  repent  that  ever  he  made  man, 
(Gen.  vi.,)  and  consequently  the  world  for  man,  and  therefore  it 
took  off  that  complacency  or  rest  and  refreshing  in  thia  bis  work  ; 
if,  tlterefore,  Ihe  Lord  betake  himself  to  work  a  new  work,  a  new 
creation  or  renovation  of  all  things  in  and  by  his  Son,  iu  which  . 
he  will  forever  re^l,  may  not  the  day  of  hia  rest  be  then  jastty 
changed  into  the  first  of  seven,  on  which  day  his  rest  in  his  new 
work  began,  whereof  he  will  never  repent?  If  the  Lord  vary 
his  rest,  may  not  he  vary  the  time  and  day  of  it  ?  Nay,  must 
not  the  time  and  day  of  our  rest  be  varied,  because  the  ground 
of  God's  rest  in  a  new  work  is  changed  ? 

TXem's  18.  As  it  was  no  necessary  duly,  tliereforfl,  perpetu- 
ally to  observe  that  seventh  day  wherein  God  first  rested,  because 
his  i^st  on  that  day  is  now  change<l,  so  also  it  is  not  necessary 
orderly  to  observe  those  six  days  of  labor,  wherein  he  first 
labored  and  built  the  world,  of  which,  for  the  sin  of  man,  he  is 
said  to  have  repented ;  yet  notwithstanding,  though  it  be  no 
necessary  duly  to  observe  those  particular  six  days  of  labor,  and 
that  sevenih  of  rest,  jel  it  is  a  moral  duty  (as  hath  been  proved) 
to  observe  six  days  tor  labor,  and  a  seventh  for  rest ;  and  hence 
it  follows  that,  although  the  Lord  Christ's  rest  on  the  day  of  hia 
resurrection  (the  first  day  of  the  week)  might  and  may  justly 
be  taken  as  a  ground  of  our  rest  on  the  same  day,  yet  his 
labor  in  the  work  of  redemption  three  and  thirty  years  and  up- 
ward, all  the  days  of  his  life  and  humiliation,  could  not  nor 
can  not  justly  be  made  the  ground  or  example  of  our  labor,  so  as 
we  must  labor  and  work  thirty-three  years  together  before  wo 
keep  a  Sabbath  the  day  of  Christ's  rest.  Because,  although  God 
could  alter  and  change  the  day  of  rest  without  infringement 
of  the  morality  of  the  fourth  commandment,  yet  he  could  not 
make  the  example  of  Christ's  labor  thirty-three  years  together 
the  ground  and  example  of  our  continuance  in  our  work,  with- 
out manifest  breach  of  that  moral  rule,  vir. :  that  man  shall 
have  sis  days  together  for  liilwr,  and  the  seventh  for  rest.  For 
man  may  rest  the  first  day  of  the  week,  and  withal  observe  six 

i    OF    TIIE    SABBATH. 


^B    days  for  labor,  and  so  keep  the  fourth  commnndraent;  but  he 
^V    can  not  labor  thirty-three  years  together,  and  then  keep  a  Sabbath, 
^      without  apparent  breach  of  the  same  commainlineni  i  and  there- 
fore that  argument  of  Master  Braboum  against  our  Chriatian 
Sabbath  melts  into  vatiity,  wherein  he  urgetb  an  equity  of  the 
change  of  the  days  of  our  labor, "  either  three  days  only  together, 

>(a&  Christ  did  lie  in  the  grave,}  or  thirty-three  years  togethtir,  (aa 
be  did  all  the  daya  of  bb  humiliation,)  in  case  we  will  moke  a 
change  of  the  Sabbath,  from  the  change  of  the  day  of  Christ's 
rest."  And  yet  I  confess  ingenuously  with  him,  that  if  the  Lord 
hod  not  instituted  the  lirHt  day  of  the  week  to  be  our  Christian 
Sabbath,  all  these  and  such  like  arguings  and  reasonings  were 
invalid  to  prove  a  change ;  for  man's  reason  hath  nothing  to  do 
to  change  days  without  divine  appointment  and  institution :  these 

I  tiling  only  I  meniiou  why  the  wisdom  of  God  might  well  alter 
fbe  day.  The  proofs  that  he  hath  changed  it  shall  follow  in 
due  place. 
Tllen't  19.  The  resurrection  of  Christ  may  therefore  be  one 
ground,  not  only  of  the  sanctilication  of  the  Christian  Sabbath, 
but  also  a  sufficient  ground  of  the  abrogation  of  the  Jewish 
Sabbath.  For,  first,  the  greater  light  may  darken  the  less  and 
k  greater  work  (as  the  restoration  of  the  world  above  the 
ereatioa  of  it)  tnay  overshadow  the  less.  (Jer.  xxiii.  7-8 ;  Ex. 
zii.  2.)  '  Secondly,  man's  sin  spoiled  the  firat  re^t,  and  therefore 
tile  day  of  it  might  be  justly  abrogated.  For  the  horrible  wrath 
of  God  had  been  immediately  punred  upon  man,  (as  might  be 
proved,  atid  as  it  was  upon  the  lapsed  angels,)  and  consequently 
npon  all  creatures  for  man's  sake,  if  Christ  bad  not  ^ven  the 
Father  rest,  for  whose  sake  the  world  was  made,  (Rev.  iv.  11,) 
and  by  whose  means  and  mediation  the  world  continues  as  now 
It  doih.    (John  vi.  22.) 

Tb»iit  20.  Yet  although  Christ's  resurrection  be  one  ground 
not  only  of  the  institution  of  the  new  Sabbath,  but  also  of  the 
abro^Uion  of  the  old,  yet  it  is  not  the  only  ground  why  the  old 
was  abrogated ;  for  (as  hath  been  shown)  there  was  some  type 
dExed  to  the  Jewish  Sabbath,  by  reason  of  which  there  was 
jnM  cause  to  abrogate,  or  rather  (as  Calvin  calls  it)  to  transUte 

Ithe  Sabbath  to  another  day.  And,  therefore,  this  dasheth 
•notber  of  Mr.  Itraboum's  dreams,  who  argues  the  continuancs 
of  the  Jewish  Sabbath,  because  there  is  a  possibility  for  all 
Mtions  still  to  observe  iu  "  For,"  saith  he,  "  can  not  we  in  Eng- 
land as  well  as  they  at  Jcnisalcm  remember  that  Sabbath  ? 
Secondly,  rest  in  it.  Thirdly,  keep  it  holy.  Fourthly,  keep  the 
whole  ijay  holy.     Fifthly,  the  Inst  of  Mren.     Sixthly,  and  all 

this  tn  imitation  of  God,  Could  no  nation  (sailb  he)  besides 
the  Jews  observe  these  six  things  ?  "  Ye»,  verily,  that  they  could 
in  roapect  of  natural  ability ;  but  I  he  questiun  i»  nut  what  men  may 
or  might  do,  but  wliat  they  ouglil  to  do,  and  sliould  do.  For 
besides  the  chnnge  of  God's  rest  through  the  work  or  the  Son, 
there  was  &  lypu  affixed  lo  that  Jewish  Sabbath,  for  which  cause 
it  may  justly  vanish  ot  Christ's  death,  as  well  as  other  types,  ia 
respect  of  the  alfixed  type,  which  was  but  accidecUil ;  and  yet 
be  continued  and  preserved  in  another  day,  being  originidly  and 
essentially  moral.  A  Sabbath  was  instituted  in  parodiee,  equally 
honored  by  God  in  the  decalogue  with  alt  other  moral  laws, 
foretold  to  continue  in  the  days  of  the  gospel,  by  Ezekiel  and 
Isaiah,  (Exek.  xliii.  ult. ;  Is.  Ivi.  4-6,)  and  commended  by  Christ, 
who  bida  his  people  pray  that  their  flight  may  not  b«  in  the 
winter  or  Sabbath  day,  as  it  were  enay  to  open  these  places 
against  all  cavils ;  and  therefore  it  is  for  substance  moral  Yet 
the  word  Sabbatism,  (Ileb.  iv.  9,)  and  the  apostle's  gradation 
from  yearly  holy  days  to  monthly  new  moons,  and  from  ihem  to 
weekly  Sabbaths,  which  are  called  "shadows  of  things  to  come," 
(Col.  ii.  16,)  seems  strongly  to  argue  some  type  affixed  to  those 
individual  Sabbaths,  or  Jewish  seventh  days;  and  hence  it  is, 
perhaps,  that  the  Sabbath  ia  set  among  moral  laws  in  the  deca- 
logue, being  originally  and  essen^ally  moral,  and  yet  is  set 
among  ceremonial  feast  days,. (Lev-  xxiii.  2,  3.)  because  it  is  ac- 
cidentally typicaL  And  Iherelbre  Mr.  Braboum  need  not  rmse 
such  a  duEt,  and  cry  out,  "  O,  monstrous  I  very  strange  1  what  a 
mingle-mangle  I  what  an  hotchpotch  have  we  here  I  wliat  a  con- 
fusion and  jumbling  of  things  so  fur  distant,  as  when  morals  and 
ceremoniab  are  here  mingled  together  1 "  No.  verily,  we  do  not 
make  the  fourth  commandment  essentially  ceremonial ;  but  being 
accidentally  so,  why  may  it,  notwithstanding  this,  be  mingled 
among  the  rest  of  tie  morals?  Let  one  solid  reason  be  given, 
but  away  with  words. 

TMent  21.  If  the  qucslitm  be,  What  type  is  affixed  ond  an- 
nexed to  the  Subbath  ?  I  think  il  ditficaU  lo  find  out,  although 
man's  wanton  wit  can  easily  allegorize  and  readily  frame  imagi- 
nations enough  in  this  point.  Some  think  it  typified  Christ's 
rest  in  the  grave;  but  I  fear  this  will  not  hold,  no  more  than 
many  other  Popish  conjectures,  wherein  their  allegorizing  poe- 
tilera  abound.  Bullinger  and  some  others  think  that  it  waa  typ- 
ical in  respect  of  the  peculiar  sacriftceB  annexed  to  it,  which 
sacriiices  were  types  of  Christ.  (Num.  sxviii.  9.)  And  although 
much  might  he  said  for  this  against  that  which  Mr.  Brnbourn 
replies,  yet  I  fee  nothing  cogent  in  tliis  ;  for  the  multiplying  of 

TBE   CHA»OE   OF  THK    SABBATH.  197 

eacrifiees  (whirh  were  partes  cuHus  imtiluli)  on  lliia  day  proves 
rather  a  specialty  of  worshiping  God  more  aliunilttnlly  on  this 
diiy  timn  any  ceremon  lain  ess  in  il ;  for  if  ihe  offering  of  socrilices 
merely  should  make  a  day  cerenioiiial,  why  did  it  not  raaka 
every  day  ceremonial  in  respect  of  every  day's  offering  of  the 
morning  and  evening  sacriKce  ?  Some  think  that  our  rest 
upon  the  Sabbath  {not  God  the  Father's  rest,  as  Mr.  Bra- 
rn  turns  it)  waa  made  not  only  a  resemblance,  but  abo  « 
type,  of  our  rest  in  Clirist,  of  whicb  tlie  apostle  speaks,  (Heb. 
VI,  3,)  wbicb  is  therefore  called  a  Sabbatum,  (ver.  9,)  or  keeping 
of  a  nabbaih,  as  ibe  word  «igni(i<.-s.  What  others  would  infer 
from  this  place  to  make  the  Sabbaili  to  be  merely  ceremonial, 
and  what  Mr.  Brabourn  would  anst^er  from  hence,  that  it  is  not 
at  all  ceremonial,  may  both  of  them  be  easily  answered  here 
Kgain,  as  already  they  have  been  in  some  of  the  former  theses. 
Some  scruples  I  see  not  yet  through,  about  this  lest,  enforce  me 
herein  to  be  silent,  and  therefore  lo  leave  it  to  such  as  think  they 
may  defend  it,  as  one  ground  of  some  ailiied  type  unto  the  Jew- 
iab  Sabbath. 

Tketi*  2'2.  Learned  Junius  goes  before  us  herein,  and  points 
out  the  type  affixed  to  that  Sabbath.  For  besides  the  first  insti- 
tution of  it  in  [uu-adise,  he  makes  two  other  causes,  which  be 
«dla  accessory,  or  affixed  and  added  to  il,  1-  One  was  eiviJit, 
or  civil,  that  men  and  beosis  might  rest  from  their  toilsome  labor 
every  week.  2.  CereittoHtalii,  or  ceremonial,  for  their  solemn 
oommemoration  of  their  deliverance  out  of  Egypt,  which  we 
know  typified  our  deli vernnce  by  Christ.  (DeuU  v.  15.)  Some 
ihink,  indeed,  that  their  deliverance  out  of  Egypt  was  upon  the 
8iiibbaih  day ;  but  this  I  do  not  urge,  because,  though  it  be  very 
probable,  yet  il  is  not  certain ;  only  this  is  certain,  that  they 
were  lo  sanctify  this  day  because  of  this  their  deliverance ;  and 
H  is  certain  this  deliverance  was  typical  of  our  deliverance  by 
Christ :  and  henee  it  is  certain  that  there  was  a  type  nffiited  to 
this  Sabbath  ;  and  because  the  Scripture  is  eo  plain  and  express 
in  il,  I  um  inclined  to  think  the  some  which  Junius  dolb,  thai 
tills  is  the  type  rather  than  any  other  I  have  yet  heard  of; 
■l^nst  whicb  I  know  many  things  may  be  objected  ;  only  it  may 
be  sufficient  lo  clear  up  the  place  against  that  which  Mr.  Bro- 

Thetii  23.  "  The  deliverance  out  of  Egypt,"  sairb  he,  "  is  not 
■nt  down  as  the  ground  of  the  institution  of  the  Sabbath,  but  Oidy 

o  the  ob: 


Uie  preface  to  the  decalogui 
command,  which,  iratwiths landing. 

the  obediei 

e  general  ii 
r  every  c 

:  not  ceremonial ;  for  God 

^ftilh,  I  am  the  Lor<l,  nho  brouglil  tliee  out  of  H^ypt ;  thereroro 
keep  thou  lilt;  tir^I,  tiie  Fcn>n(l,  the  [liinl,  ihi?  Iil>h,  ih^  sixth,  es 
well  Oo  tlie  fourth  ooiomundiiienl ;  and  therefore,  nuilli  he,  we 
IDBJ  make  ererj  coiniDBiidment  ceremoniul  as  well  as  the  Sab- 
bath, if  the  motive  of  deliverance  out  of  Egypt  makes  Ihe  Sab- 
bath to  be  po."  Thb  is  tlie  substance  and  sinews  of  hi»  discourse 
herein ;  and  I  confers  it  is  true,  tbeir  deliverance  out  of  Egypt 
was  not  the  first  ground  of  the  institution  of  it,  but  God's  rest 
after  his  six  days'  labor;  yet  it  was  such  a  ground  as  we  ooiilend 
for,  viz.,  a  secondary,  and  an  annexed  or  affixed  ground.  And 
that  it  was  not  a  tnolive  only  to  observe  that  day,  (as  it  is  in  the 
preface  to  the  decalogue,)  but  a  superadded  ground  of  it,  may 
appear  from  this  one  consideration,  viz.,  because  that  very  ground 
on  which  the  Lord  urgeth  the  observation  of  the  Sabbath  in 
Ex.  XX.  11  is  wholly  left  out  in  Ihe  repetition  of  the  law,  (E)eut> 
V.  15,)  and  tbeir  deliverance  out  of  Egypt  put  into  the  room 
thereof;  for  the  grouml  in  Ex.  xx.  1 1  is  this :  "  Six  days  God 
made  heaven  and  earth,  and  rested  the  seventh  day  and  sancti- 
fied it ;  "  but  instead  of  these  words,  and  of  this  ground,  we  find 
other  words  put  into  their  room,  (Deut.  v.  15:)  "Iteraerober  thou 
wast  a  servant  in  the  land  of  Egypt,  and  that  the  Lord  brought 
thee  out  thence  with  a  mighty  hand ;  therefore  the  Lord  thy  God 
commandeth  thee  to  keep  the  Sabbath."  Which  seems  to  argue 
strongly  that  these  words  are  not  a  mere  motive,  but  anollier 
ground  of  the  observation  of  rhe  Sabbath.  And  why  might  not 
the  general  motive  in  the  preface  to  the  decalogue  serve  as  a 
snfficient  motive  to  the  obedience  of  this  commandment,  if  there 
was  no  more  but  a  motive  in  these  words  of  Deuteronomy ;  and 
therefore  I  suppose  this  was  also  the  ground  and  affixed  tyjie  unto 
the  ,lewish  Sabbath. 

7%#«i«  24.  But  Biill  Ihediffirulty  remains;  for  Mr.  Brabourn 
wilt  sny  that  those  were  but  human  reasons  :  but  what  ground  is 
there*  from  Scripture  fur  the  institution  of  another  Sabbath,  as 
well  as  the  abrogation  of  the  old  ?  which  if  it  be  not  cleared,  I 
confess  this  cause  sinks:  here,  therefore, let  it  be  again  observed 
that  we  are  not  to  expect  such  evidence  from  Scripture  concern- 
ing this  change,  (as  fond  and  humorous  wit  sometimes  pleads  for,) 
in  tliii  controversy,  namely,  that  Christ  should  come  with  drum 
and  trumpet,  as  it  were,  upon  Mount  Zion,  and  proclwm  by  word 
or  writing,  in  so  many  express  words,  that  the  Jewish  Sabbath 
is  abrogated,  and  the  first  day  of  the  week  instituted  in  its  room, 
to  be  observed  of  all  Christians  to  the  end  of  the  world.  .  For  it 
la  not  the  Lord's  manner  so  to  speak  in  many  other  things  which 
■ "  \  kingdom,  but  as  it  were  occasionally,  or  in  way  of 

^B  THE   CHANGE   OP  TUK    SABDATtl.  199 

^K.tatlorj.  or  epislle  to  some  jiiirticular  church  or  people  ;  and  thus 

f^^  he  doth  coiicerninf;  ihe  Sabbath  ;  and  yet  Wisdom's  mind  is  plain 

"     mough  to  them  ihnt  undcrslujid.     Nar  do  I  doubt  but  that  those 

scripnireB  which  arc  sometimes  alleged  tor  the  change  of  the 

Sabbath,  although  at  the  first  blush  ihey  may  not  seem  to  bear  up 

the  weight  of  this  muse,  yet  being  thoroughly  considered,  ihoy 

III      are  not  only  suilicient  to  stablish  modest  mind<i,  but  are  also  Huch 

|k  ■■  may  t-nmiofilieir,  or  slop  the  mouths  eren  of  wranglers  them- 

■  »lve«. 

11^  TKmi*  2.5.  I  do  not  think  that  the  exercise  of  holy  duties  on 
a  dity  argues  that  such  a  day  is  the  Christian  Sabbmh  day  i  for 
the  apostles  preached  commouly  upon  the  Jewish  Sabbath, 
Mmetimes  upon  the  tirsi  day  of  the  weelt  also  ;  and  therefore  the 
bare  exercise  of  holy  duties  on  a  day  is  no  suindenl  argument 

Idut  either  the  one  or  the  other  is  the  Christian  Sabbath  ;  for 
Aen  there  might  be  two  Siibbnilis.  yea.  many  Sabbaths,  in  a 
week,  because  there  may  he  many  holy  duties  in  several  days 
of  the  week,  which  we  know  is  against  the  morality  of  the  fourth 
Thcm't  2C.  Vel,  notwithatanding,  although  holy  duties  on  a 
day  do  not  argue  such  a  day  to  be  our  Sabbath,  yel  that  day 
which  is  set  apart  for  Sabbath  services  rather  than  any  other 
iMy,  and  u  honored  above  any  other  day  for  that  end,  surely 
mch  a  day  is  the  Christian  Sabbath.  Now,  if  it  may  appear 
that  the  lint  day  of  the  we^k  was  thus  honored,  then  certainly 
it  is  to  be  accounted  Ihe  Christian  Sabbath. 
ThtiU  27.  The  primitive  pattern  churches  thus  honored  the 
flnt  day  of  the  week  ;  and  what  they  practiced  without  reproof, 
diat  the  apostles  (who  plumed  those  churches)  enjoined  and 
preached  unto  them  so  to  do ;  nl  least  in  such  weighty  mallt-rs 
as  the  change  of  days,  of  prcl'erring  one  before  that  other  which 
the  Lord  hath  bonoivd  before  ;  ami  what  the  apostles  preached, 
that  tlie  Lord  Jesus  commanded,  (Mntt.  sxviii.  20,)  "  Go  teach  all 
nations  tlial  which  I  command  you."  Unless  any  shall  think  tliat 
ihe  apostles  sometimes  went  beyond  iheir  commission  to  teach 
tlial  to  others  which  Christ  never  commanded,  which  is  blasphe- 
nous  to  imagine ;  for  though  they  might  err  in  practice  as  men, 
and  ■■  Peter  did  at  Antioch,  and  Faul  and  BarDalma  in  their 
ronienlion,  yet  in  their  public  ministry  they  were  i[>ra1lib1y  and 
cxiraordiaarily  assisted,  especially  in  such  things  which  tlicy 
hold  forth  as  patterns  for  after  times  i  if,  iberdbre,  the  primi- 
tive churches  thns  honored  the  finil  day  of  the  week  alnve  any 
other  day  for  Sabbath  services,  then  certainly  they  were  Jnsti- 
taied  and  taught  thus  to  do  by  tlie  apostles  approving  of  tbrm 





I  from 


herein:  nnd  whal  the  aposllea  tmiglil  the  ehiirrlies,l1iat  llie  Lord  1 
Jiisiis  coinmiinded  to  ihe  apostles.     So  that  the  approved  practice 
of  the  churches  herein  shows  whul  was  Ihe  doctrine  of  the 
apostles;  and  tlie  doctrine  of  the  apostles  shows  what  wae  the 
command  of  Christ ;  eo  that  the  sanctiti cation  of  this  first  day 
the  week   is  no  human  Iradilion,  hut  a  divine  iastitutioo  f 
Christ  himself. 

ITtttii  28.  That  the  churches  honored  this  da^  above  any 
other  shall  appear  in  its  place,  as  also  that  the  n[toslleit  com- 
manded them  so  to  do.  Yet. Mr.  Primrose  sailh,  that  this  latter 
IB  doubtful;  and  ilr.  Ironftidc  (not  questioning  the  matter)  falls 
off  with  another  evasion,  viz.,  that  they  acted  herein  not  as  apos- 
tles, but  ns  ordinary  pastors,  and  consequently  as  fallible  men,  not 
only  in  commanding  this  change  of  the  Sabbath,  but  in 'all  other 
mailers  of  church  govemmeni,  (aowng  which  he  reckons  this  of 
the  Sabbath  to  be  one,)  which  he  ihinks  were  imposed  according 
to  iheir  private  wisdom,  as  most  fit  for  those  times,  but  not  by 
any  apostolical  commission  as  concerning  all  times.  But  to  im- 
agine that  matters  of  church  goTcrnmegt  in  the  apostles'  days 
were  coals  for  the  moon  in  respect  of  after  time^,  and  that  the 
form  of  it  is  mutable,  (as  he  would  have  it,)  I  suppose  will  be 
digested  by  few  honest  and  sober  minds  in  these  times,  unless 
they  be  biased  for  a  season  by  politic  ends,  and  therefore  herein 
I  will  not  contend ;  only  it  may  be  considered  whether  any  pri- 
vate spirit  could  abolish  that  day,  which  from  the  beginning  of 
the  world  God  so  highly  honoi'ed,  and  then  honor  and  advance 
another  day  above  it,  and  sanctify  it  too  (as  shall  be  proved)  for 
religious  ecrvices.  Could  any  do  this  justly  but  by  immediate 
dispensation  from  the  Lord  Christ  Jesus?  And  if  the  apostles 
did  thus  receive  it  immediately  from  Christ,  and  ao  teach  the  ob- 
servation of  it,  they  could  not  then  teach  it  as  fallible  men  and  as 
private  pastors,  as  he  would  have  it ;  a  pernicious  conceit,  enough 
to  undermine  the  faith  of  God's  elect  in  many  mailers  more 
weighty  than  this  of  the  Sabbalh. 

Thetit  29.  To  know  when  and  where  the  Lord  Christ  in- 
etpucled  his  disciples  concerning  this  change,  is  needle^t^s  to  inquire. 
It  is  suincient  to  believe  this:  thai  what  the  primitive  churches 
exemptarily  practiced,  that  waa  taught  them  by  the  agioslles  uho 
planted  Iheui ;  and  ihal  whatsoever  the  apostles  preached,  the 
Lord  Christ  commanded,  as  hath  been  shown.  Yd  if  the  change 
of  the  Sabbath  be  a  mailer  appertaining  to  the  kingdom  of  Crod, 
why  should  we  doubt  but  that,  within  Ihe  space  of  his  forty  days' 
abode  with  ihem  after  his  resurrection,  he  then  taught  it  them? 
fur  it  is  expressly  said,  that  he  then  taught  them  liuch  things. 



T^ttii  30.  Wlicn  tlie  aposiles  came  among  the  Jews,  they 
preached  usually  ujxia  ihe  Jewish  Sabbaih  ;  but  thid  wiu  not  be- 
CBuite  ihey  did  tliink  or  appoint  it  herein  lo  be  tlie  Christian 
Ssbbatb,  but  that  ihey  might  lake  the  fittest  opportunity  mid  Bea- 
con of  meeting  with,  and  bo  of  preaching  the  goapel  to,  the  Jews 
in  those  times.  For  what  power  had  they  lo  call  them  to< 
geiher  when  they  saw  meet?  Or,  if  they  hud,  yet  was  it  raeet 
for  them  thus  to  do,  before  they  were  sufficiently  instructed  about 
God'ii  mind  for  setting  apart  some  other  time  ?  And  how  could 
tbey  be  sufficiently  and  seasonably  instructed  herein  without 
watching  the  advantage  of  those  limes  which  the  Jews  thought 
were  (he  only  Sabbaths  ?  The  days  of  pentecoel,  pas»over,  and 
hours  of  prayer  in  the  temple  are  lo  be  observed  still  as  well  as 
the  Jewish  Sabbath,  if  the  apostles'  preaching  on  their  Sabbaths 
argues  the  continuance  of  them,  as  Mr.  Brabourn  argues ;  for  we 
know  that  they  preached  also,  and  went  up  purposely  lo  Jerusa- 
lem, at  such  times,  to  preach  among  them,  aa  well  as  upon  the 
Sabbath  days ;  look  therefore,  as  Ihey  laid  hold  upon  the  days  of 

Setitecost  and  pujisoTer  as  the  Httcst  seasons  to  preach  to  the 
ews,  but  not  thinking  that  such  feasts  should  still  b«  continued, 
M  it  is  in  iheir  preaching  upon  the  Jewish  Sabbaths. 

Thftii  31.  Nor  did  the  apostles  sinfully  Judaize  by  preaching 
to  the  Jews  upon  their  SuiiboLhs,  (as  Mr.  Brabourn  would  infer;) 
supposing  that  their  Sabbaths  should  not  be  still  observed,  they 
■bould  then  Judaize  and  afier  ceremonies,  (saith  he,)  and  so  build 
up  those  things  whicii  they  labored  to  destroy.  For  suppose 
tbey  did  observe  sucli  days  and  Sabbaths  as  were  ceremonial  for 
K  time,  yet  it  being  done  not  in  conscience  of  the  day,  but  in  con- 
science of  taking  so  fit  a  season  to  preach  the  goepel  In,  it  could 
not  nor  can  not  be  any  sinful  Judaizing,  especially  while  then 
the  Jews  were  not  sufficiently  instructed  about  the  abolishing  of 
those  things.  For  Mr.  Brabourn  could  not  but  know  that  all 
the  Jewish  ceremonies,  being  once  the  ap|)oinlment  of  God,  were 
to  have  an  honorable  burial,  and  that  therefore  ihcy  might  be 
lawfully  observed  for  a  time  among  the  Jews,  until  they  were 
more  fully  instructed  about  them ;  and  hence  Paul  circumcised 
Timothy  because  of  the  Jews,  (Acts  xvi.  3,)  and  did  olbor- 
wiie  confuriu  to  them,  that  so  he  might  win  and  gain  the  more 
upon  tbcm ;  and  if  Paul  observed  purposely  a  Jewish  ceremony 
«  eircumcision  which  was  not  necessary,  nay,  which  was  not 
lawful  to  b«  observed  among  the  Gentiles,  (Gal.  v.  2,)  and  yet  he 

preach  the  goapel,  which  i 

itself  a  necessary  duty,  ui>0[)  ii 

bwbb  Snbbalh  which  fell  oul  occosiooally  10  him,  and  therefore 



might  lawfully  be  observed  for  such  an  end  among  ihe  Jews, 
which  among  the  Gentilea  might  be  unlawful  ?  Suppose  there- 
fore tbtit  lUe  apostles  might  bave  Inughl  Iho'Jen-e  from  huu^  to 
house,  (as  Mr-  Braboum  argues  against  the  neeesfiitj  put  upon 
the  apostles  to  preach  upon  the  Jewish  Sabbath,)  yet  what  reason 
or  conscience  was  there  to  lose  the  opportunity  of  public  preach- 
ing for  the  more  plentiful  gathering  in  of  souls,  when  many  are 
met  together,  and  which  may  lawfully  be  done,  and  he  contented 
only  to  seek  their  good  in  such  private  ways  ?  And  wlrnt  although. 
Paul  did  assemble  the  chief  of  the  Jews  together  at  Rome,  when 
he  was  a  prisoner,  to  acquaint  them  with  civil  matters  about  bis 
imprisonment,  (Acts  xxviii.  17  ;}  yet  had  be  power  to  do  thus  in 
all  places  where  be  came  f  or  was  it  meet  for  him  so  to  do  ?  Did 
not  he  submit  the  appointment  of  a  sacred  assembly  to  hear  the 
word  rather  unto  them  than  assume  it  to  himself?  (Acts  xsv iii. 
23.)  It  is  therefore  false  and  unsound  which  Hr.  Brahourn 
aflirras,  vii.,  tliat  Paul  did  preach  on  the  Jewish  Sabbath  in  con- 
science of  the  day,  not  merely  with  respect  of  the  opportunity  he 
then  took  from  their  own  public  meetings  then  to  preach  to 
tliem ;  for  (saith  he)  Paul  had  power  to  assemble  them  together 
,  on  other  days.  This,  I  say,  is  both  false ;  for  he  that  wm  so 
much  spoken  against  among  them  might  not  in  all  pla'^e.s  be  able 
to  put  forth  such  a  power;  as  also  it  is  unsound  ;  for  suppose  he 
had  such  a  power,  yet  whether  it  was  so  meet  for  him  to  put  it 
forth  in  appointing  other  times,  may  be  easily  judged  of  by  what 
hath  been  said. 

TTuiis  32.  Nor  is  there  a  foundation  here  laid  of  making  all 
other  actions  of  the  apostles  unwarrantable  or  unimiiable,  (as  Mr. 
Braboum  saith,)  because  we  are  not  to  imitate  the  apostles  herein 
in  preaching  upon  the  Jewish  Sabbaths.  For  no  actions  either 
of  Christ  or  the  apostles,  which  were  done  merely  in  respect  of 
some  special  occasion,  or  special  reason,  are,  ea  tenui,  or  in  that 
respect,  binding  to  others ;  for  the  example  of  Christ  eating  the 
Iiord'a  supper  only  with  men,  not  women,  in  an  upper  chamber, 
and  toward  the  dark  evening,  doth  not  bind  ua  to  exclude  women, 
or  not  to  celebrate  in  other  places  and  times,  because  we  know 
that  these  actions  were  merely  occasioned  in  respect  of  special 
reasons,  (as  the  eating  of  the  passover  with  one's  own  family, 
Christ's  family  not  consisting  of  women,)  so  it  is  here  in  respect 
of  the  Sabbath.  Tlie  apostles  preaching  upon  the  Jewish  Sab- 
baths was  merely  occasional,  by  occasion  of  the  public  meetings 
(their  liiiest  lime  to  do  good  in)  wliich  were  upon  this  and  any 
other  day. 

TTiettM  33.     Now,  although  the  Jews  observing  this  day,  the 


tposlles  observed  il  among  the  Jen-g  by  preaching'  among  them, 
Tel  we  slinlt  (iiid  thai  amoii}:  the  Cliristian  Gentile  churches  and 
believers,  (where  no  Judaism  wna  U>  be  eo  mueJi  as  loleraled  for  " 

,)  not  any  such  dity  vna  thus  observed  ;  nay,  another  day, 
the  first  day  in  the  week,  is  honored  and  preferred  by  the  apos- 
tles above  any  other  day  in  ihe  week  for  religious  and  Sabbath 
■ervictis.  Fur,  alihougb  holy  duties  do  not  argue  always  a  holy 
day,  yet  when  we  shail  find  the  Hoiy  Ghost  single  out  and  nomi- 
nate one  particular  day  to  be  observed  and  honored  rather  than 
any  other  day,  and  rather  tlian  the  Jewish  seventh  day  itself,  for 
Sobbttlb  services  and  holy  duties,  this  undeniably  proves  that  duy 
to  be  the  Chri^itian  Sablmth,  and  this  we  shall  make  evident  to 
be  the  Brut  day  of  the  week  ;  which  one  thing  seriously  minded 
(if  proved)  doth  utterly  subvert  the  whole  frame  and  force  of 
Mr.  Brabcum's  shady  discourse  for  the  observation  of  the  Jewish 
SKbbaUi.  and  luoit  effectually  establisbech  the  Christian  Sabballi. 
Hr.  Brahoum  therefore  herein  bestirs  his  wits,  and  tells  us,  on  the 
contrary,  that  Paul  preached  not  only  to  the  Jews,  but  even  unto 
Ihe  Gentiles,  upon  tliis  Jewish  Siibbatli,  rather  than  any  other 
day:  and  fur  this  end  brings  double  proof:  one  is  Acts  xiii.  42,  44, 
Vhere  the  Gentiles  are  said  to  desire  Paul  to  preacli  to  them, 
^  lu  fittaii  aiGSatai',  i.  e^  Ihe  week  Ijetween.  or  any  day  be- 
tween till  the  next  Sabbath,  (as  some  translate  it,)  or  (if  Sir. 
Braboum  will)  the  nest  Sabbath,  or  Jewish  Sabbath.  wht;n 
BlsKMt  oil  the  city  came  out  to  hear  Paul,  who  were  most  of  them 
Gentiles,  not  Jews.  Be  it  so,  they  were  Gentiles  indeed ;  but  as 
jet  no  church  or  Christian  church  of  Gentiles  actually  utider 
Christ's  government  and  ordinances,  among  whom  (I  say)  the 
Srst  <lay  of  tlie  week  was  so  much  honored  above  any  other  day 
for  sacred  assemblies.  For  it  is  no  wonder  if  ttie  apostles  yield 
to  their  desires  in  preaching  any  lime  of  the  week  which  they 
tbought  the  best  tim«,  even  upon  the  Jewish  Sabbalh,  among 
whom  the  Jews  being  mingled,  they  might  have  the  fitter  oppor- 
tnoily  to  preach  to  them  also,  and  so  become  all  things  to  all  men 
to  gain  some.  His  second  proof  is  Acts  xvL  12,  13;  and  here 
ho  telU  ud  that  Paul  and  Timothy  preached,  not  to  the  Jews,  but 
to  the  Gentiles,  upon  the  Sabbath  day.  I  confess  they  are  not 
called  Jtuv  no  more  than  it  is  said  that  they  were  GeiUilr* ;  but 
why  might  not  Lydia  and  her  company  be  Jews  or  Jewish  prose- 

StM,  who,  we  know,  did  observe  the  Jewish  Sabbath  strictly  till 
ey  were  belter  instructed,  aa  they  did  all  other  Jewish  cere- 
monies also?  For  Lydia  is  expressly  said  lo  be  one  who  wor- 
shiped God  before  Paul  came.  Mr.  Braboum  tells  us  they 
were  no  Jewish  proselytes,  because  they  hod  no  Jewish  syna- 




201  TUK  cnANGi:  vv  tuu  sabbath. 

gogtie,  and  therefore  they  were  fuin  lo  go  out  of  the  city  into  the 
(leliJs,  Ijeside  a  river  to  pray.  I  confess  the  text  saith  that  they 
vrf  lit  out  to  a  river  aide,  where  prayer  waa  tvont  to  bo  made ;  but 
that  this  was  tbo  open  field.',  and  that  there  waa  no  oratory, 
house,  or  pkce  of  shelter  to  meet  and  pray  in,  ihis  is  uot  id  the 
text,  but  it  is  Mr.  Brubourn's  comment  and  gloas  on  it.  But  . 
Buppose  it  was  iu  the  open  fields,  and  that  they  had  no  synagogue  i 
yet  will  it  follow  that  these  were  not  Jews  ?  Might  not  the  Jews 
be  in  a  Gentile  city  for  a  time,  without  any  synagogue,  especially 
if  their  number  ))e  hut  small,  and  thia  smiill  uumber  consist 
ehiefly  of  women,  as  it  seems  this  did,  whose  heartii  God  touehed, 
leaving  their  husbands  to  their  own  ways?  If  they  were  not 
Jews,  or  Jewish  proMlytes,  why  did  they  ehooee  the  Sabbath 
day,  (which  the  Jews  eo  much  set  by,)  rather  than  any  other,  lo 
pray  and  worship  God  It^ether  in  ?  But  verUy  such  answers  aa 
those,  wherewith  the  poor  man  abounds  in  his  treatise,  make  me 
estremely  fear  that  he  rather  stretched  his  conscience  than  was 
acted  by  a  plain  deluded  conscience  in  this  point  of  the  Sabbath. 
TTieiit  34.  It  remains,  therefore,  to  prove  thai  the  first  day 
of  the  week  is  the  Christian  Sabbath  by  divine  institution  ;  and  ' 
this  may  nppear  from  those  three  texts  of  Scripture  ordinarily 
alleged  for  this  end:  1.  Acts  xx.  7;  2.  1  Cor.  xvi.  2;  9. 
Hev.  i.  10 ;  which,  being  taken  jointly  together,  hold  these  three 
things :  — 

1.  That  ihu  first  day  of  the  week  was  honored  above  any  other 
day  lijr  Sabbath  services  in  the  primitive  church's  practice,  as  is 
evident,  Acts  xx.  7. 

2.  That  the  apostles  commanded  the  observation  of  this  day 
rather  than  any  other  for  Sabbath  services,  as  is  evident,  1  Cor. 
xvi.  1,  2. 

3.  That  this  day  is  holy,  and  sanctified  to  be  holy  to  the  Lord 
above  any  other  day,  and  therefore  it  halh  the  Lord's  name 
upon  it,  (a  usual  sign  of  things  holy  to  him,)  and  therefore  called 
the  Lord's  day,  as  is  evideul.  Rev.  i.  10  ;  but  these  things  need 
more  particular  ex  plication. 

Tiitu  85.  In  the  first  of  these  places,  (Acta  xx.  7,)  these 
particiilarB  are  manifest  r  — 

1.  Tliat  the  church  of  Troas  (called  disciples)  publicly  and 
generally  now  met  together,  so  that  it  was  no  private  church 
meting,  (as  some  eay,)  but  general  and  open,  according  as  ihoso 
times  would  give  leave. 

2.  That  this  meeting  was  u]]on  the  first  day  of  the  week, 
ealled  ir  ig  iiia  tu-y  audliitaii  :  which  phrase,  although  Gomarus, 
Primrose,  Heylin,  and  many  others  go  about  lo  translate  thus, 

•is.,  upon  one  of  the  days  of  llie  week.  Y«t  this  U  sufficient  to 
dash  dial  dream,  (besides  what  else  might  be  said,)  viz.,  that 
this  phrase  is  espounded  in  other  Scriptures  to  be  rhe  first  day 

lot  the  week,  (Lukexxiv.  1  ;  John  xx.  I,)  hal  never  to  be  tbunil 

Kbroughout  all  the  Scriptures  expounded  of  one  day  in  the  week. 

wOoniarus  indeed  tells  us  of  if  ;"<•  ^osfivir,  (Luke  t.  17,  und  riii. 

ftSSt  &nd  xz.  1,)  which  is  translated  quodam  die,  or  a  certain  day; 

■tat  this  will  not  help  hini,  for  this  Li  not  ir  ifj  fiu  tuf  uaS€itiar, 

»■  it  is  in  this  place. 

W   8.  That  the  end  of  this  meeting  was  holy  duties,  viz.,  to  break 

Vbread.  or  Ut  receive  the  Lord's  supper,  as  the  phrase  is  expound- 

■  ad,  (Acts  ii.  43,)  which  was  therefore  accompanied  with  preacb- 
Klng  the  word  and  prayer,  holy  preparation  and  serious  meditu- 
fttion  about  those  great  mysteries.  Nor  can  this  breaking  of 
V'tread  be  interpreted  of  their  love  feasts,  or  common  suppers, 
K  ■■  Gomarua  saspects.     For  their  love  feasts  and  common  sup- 

■  pera  were  not  of  the  whole  church  together,  (as  this  was,)  but  in 
pgereriil  houses,  as  Mr.  Cartwright  proves  from  Acts  ii.  4ti,  And 
■.llthough  tlic  Corinthians  used  their  love  feasts  in  public,  yet  they 

Eg*dly  reproied  for  it  by  the  apo«lle,(l  Cor.  x\.  12,)  and 
reforc  he  would  not  allow  it  here. 
k  4.  It  is  not  said  that  Paul  called  them  together  because  he 
■was  to  depart  the  nest  day,  or  that  they  purposely  declined  the 
Eliord'a  supper  till  that  day  because  then  Paul  was  to  depart,  (as 
kUt.  Primrose  urgeth ;)  but  tlie  text  speaks  of  it  as  of  a  time  and 
uhf  usually  observed  of  them  before,  and  therefore  it  is  said,  (hat 
■*  when  they  came  together  to  break  bread ; "  and  Paul  thcreture 
Ktook  his  opportunity  of  preaching  to  them,  and  seems  to  slay 
K^rposuly,  und  wait  seven  days  among  Ihem,  that  he  miglit  com- 
■niinivatc  with  them,  and  jireach  unto  them  in  this  ordinary  time 
mtt  public  meeting;  and  therefore,  though  he  might  privately  iu- 
nHruct  und  preach  to  them  the  other  seven  days,  yet  his  preaching 
BbBw  is  mentioned  in  regard  of  some  special  solemnity  of  meeting 
Hbb  this  A»y. 

B  &.  The  first  day  was  honored  above  any  other  day  for  these 
^W^It  duties,  or  else  why  did  they  nut  meet  upon  the  last  day  of 
nhe  week,  the  Jewish  Sabballt,  for  these  ends  ?  For  if  tlie 
BChridlinn  churches  were  bound  to  oliserve  the  Jewish  Sabbath, 

■  'M^iy  did  they  not  meet  tlien,  and  honor  the  seventh  day  above  , 
l]0M  first  day?  considering  that  it  was  but  the  day  before,  and 
■iberefore  might  easily  have  done  it,  more  fitly,  loo,  hod  ihat 
neveitth  day  been  the  Christian  Sabbath. 

■  6.  Why  is  the  first  day  of  the  week  mentioned,  which  is  at- 
nUbuted  only  in  the  New  Testament  tu  the  day  of  Clirist's  resur* 




206  THE   CHANGH;   OP    THE   SjIBBATU.  } 

reclion,  unless  Ibis  day  was  ihen  usually  honors iJ  Biid  sanctified 
for  holy  duties,  calk-d  here  breaking  of  hreaii,  by  a  synealocbe 
of  a  part  for  the  wbulc,  and  theretbre  comprehends  all  other 
Sabbath  dutiex  ?  For  there  is  no  more  reason  lo  esclade  prayer, 
preaching,  singing  of  psalmg,  etc,  because  these  are  not  men- 
tioned, than  to  exclude  drinking  of  wine  in  the  sacrament,  (as 
the  blind  Papists  do,)  because  this  neither  is  here  made  men- 
tion of.  Mr.  Prirorosc  indeed  tells  us  thai  it  may  be  the  first 
day  of  the  week  is  named  in  respect  of  Ihe  miracle  done  in  it 
upon  EutychuB.  But  the  text  is  plain ;  the  time  of  the  meeting 
is  mentioned,  and  the  end  of  it  to  break  breail,  and  the  miracle 
is  bm  brought  in  as  a  particular  event  which  happened  on  this 
day,  which  was  set  apart  fii'st  for  higher  ends. 

7.  Nor  is  it  said  in  the  text  that  the  church  of  Troas  met  every 
day  together  lo  receive  the  sacrament,  (as  Mr.  Primrose  sug- 
gests.) and  that  therefore  this  action  of  breaking  bread  was  done 
without  respect  lo  any  particular  or  special  day.  it  being  per- 
formed every  day.  For  I  do  not  tinit  that  the  primitive  church 
received  the  Lord's  supper  every  day ;  for  though  it  be  said 
(Acts  ii,  42)  that  the  church  continued  in  the  apostles'  fellow- 
ship and  breaking  of  bread  ;  yet  it  is  not  said  that  they  brake 
bread  every  day.  They  are  indeed  said  to  be  daily  in  the  tem- 
ple, (ver.  46,)  but  not  that  they  brake  bread  every  day  in  the 
temple,  or  IVom  houi«  lo  house,  or  if  they  should,  yet  the  break- 
ing of  bread  in  this  verse  is  meant  of  common,  not  sacred  bread, 
Hs  it  is  verse  42,  where  I  think  the  bread  was  no  more  common 
than  their  continuance  in  the  apostles'  doctrine  and  fellowship 
was  common ;  and  therefore  in  this  4fiih  verse  the  phrase  is  al' 
tered,  and  the  original  word  properly  signifies  ordinary  bread 
n  nourishment.  And  yet  suppose  they  did  receive  the 
t  every  day,  yet  here  the  breaking  of  bread  is  made 
)f  as  the  opui  diei,  or  the  special  business  of  the  day; 
and  the  day  is  mentioned  as  the  special  time  for  such  a  purpose ; 
and  hence  no  other  day  (if  tliey  brake  bread  in  it)  is  mentioned, 
imd  therefore  it  is  called  in  effect  "  the  day  of  meeting  to  break 
bread."  Nor  do  1  find  in  all  the  Scripture  a  day  distinctly  men- 
tioned for  holy  duties,  (as  this  first  day  of  the  week  is,)  wherein  a 
whole  people  or  church  meet  together  for  such  ends ;  but  that 
day  was  holy :  the  naming  of  the  particular  day  for  such  ends 
implies  the  holiness  of  il,  and  the  time  is  purposely  mentioned, 
that  others  in  aflertimes  might  purposely  and  specially  observe 
that  day. 

i.  Nor  is  it  said  that  the  disciples  met  together  the  night  after 
the  first  day  ;  but  it  is  expressly  said  to  be  upon  the  first  day  of 

THE   CHANGE   Or  THE   SABBATn.  207 

the  week :  and  suppose  (as  Mr.  Braboiirn  aailh)  tliat  their  meel- 
uig  was  not  together  in  the  morniug,  hut  only  in  the  evening 
time  to  celebrate  the  Lord's  supper,  )i  little  before  the  abutting 
.  ia  or  the  dny ;  yet  it  b  a  sufficJeni  ground  for  conscience  to  observe 
I  this  day  above  any  other  for  holy  services,  although  every  part 
r  of  (he  day  be  not  filled  up  with  public  and  church  duties ;  for 
I   aupposo  the  Levitcs  on  the  Jewish  Snbhath  should  do  no  holy 
public  duty  on  llieir  own  Sabbath  until  the  day  was  far  spent ; 
will  Mr.  Briihoiiro  argue  from  thence  that  the  Jewish   Sabbath 
VMB  not  wholly  holy  unto  Gtod  ?     But  again  :  suppose  ihe  latter 
pan  of  the  day  was  spent  in  breaking  qf  bread ;  yet  will  it  follow  j 

that  DO  other  part  of  the  day  was  spent  before,  either  in  any  H 

private  or  pubhe  holy  dutica?     Possibly  they  might  receive  th«  H 

Lord's  supper  in  the  evening  of  this  Sabbath,  (for  the  time  of  ^ 

this  action  IB  in  the  general  indifferent ;)  yet  might  they  not  spend 
the  rest  of  the  morning  in  public  duties,  as  we  know  some  do 
nnw  in  some  churches,  who  are  said  to  meet  together  to  break 
bread  the  latter  part  of  this  day,  and  yet  sanctify  the  Sabbath 
the  whole  day  beibrc  ?     Suppose  it  be  not  expre^ly  said  tliat  ^M 

they  did  shut  up  shop  windows  at  Trons,  and  forsake  the  plow  ^M 

knd  .the  wheel,  and  abstain  from  all  servile  work;    yet  if   he  ^M 

believes  that  no  more  was  done  this  day  hut  what  ia  expressly  H 

Kt  down,  Mr.  Urabourn  must  needs  see  a  pitiful  face  of  Christ  in 
the  Lord*8  supper,  and  people  coming  rushing  upon  it  without 
ly  serious  examination  or  preparation,  or  singing  of  psalms,  be- 
uae  no  such  duties  as  these  are  mentioned  to  be  upon  this  day. 
9.  Lastly,  Master  Primrose,  like  a  staggering  man,  knows  not 
whftt  to  fasten  on  in  answer  to  this  place,  and  therefore  lells  us, 
"la  suppose  it  was  a  Sabbath,  jet  that  it  might  be  taken  up 
mn  the  church's  liberty  and  custom,  rather  than  from   any 
ivine  institution  ;  but  besides  that  which  hath  been  said  to  dash 
Ua  dream,  (Thesis.  27, }  the  falseness  of  this  common  and  l>old 
Utenion  will  appear  more  fully  in  the  explication  of  the  second 
test,  (1    Cor.  xvi.   1,  2.)   which  now  follows,  whereui  it  will 
Kppcar  to  be  an  apostolical  (and  tlierefore  a  divine)  institution 
from  Jesus  ChrisL 

TKffif  36.  In  the  second  of  the  places  therefore  alleged, 
(1  Cor.  xvi.  1,  2,)  these  things  are  considerable  to  prove  the 
nmt  day  in  the  week  to  he  the  Christum  Sabbath,  and  that  not 
ao  mud)  by  the  church's  practice,  as  by  the  apostle's  precept  j 

1.  Although  it  be  true,  that  in  some  cases  collections  may  be 
made  any  day  for  the  poor  saints,  yet  why  doth  the  apostle  here 
limit  ibcm  to  (his  day  for  ihe  perlurmance  of  thb  duty  ?     They 



that  translate  '«i't  /I'ur  oaSdiioii;  upon  one  day  of  the  week,  do 
iniseratily  mistake  the  pbrase,  which  in  Scripture  phrase  only 
sigDifics  ihe  first  day  of  it,  and  beat  their  foreheads  against  the 
main  scoi>e  of  the  aposilc,  viz.,  to  fix  a  certain  daj  for  such  a 
duly  as  required  bucIi  a  certain  time ;  for  tliey  might  (by  this 
translation)  collect  their  benevolences  one  day  in  four  or  tea 
years,  for  then  it  should  be  done  one  day  in  a  week. 

2.  The  apostle  dolh  not  only  limit  Ihem  lo  this  time,  but  also 
all  the  churches  of  Galalio,  (ver.  1,)  and  consequently  all 
other  churches,  if  that  be  true,  (2  Cor.  viii.  13,  14,)  wherein  the 
apostle  professcth  he  preswlh  not  one  church,  that  he  may  ease 
another  chnrch,  but  that  there  be  an  equality  ;  and  although  I 
Bee  no  ground,  from  this  text,  that  the  maintenance  of  the  min- 
istry should  be  raised  every  Sabbaih  day,  (for  Christ  would  not 
have  them  reckoned  among  the  poor,  being  biborers  worthy  of 
their  hire,)  and  although  this  collection  was  for  the  poor  saints 
of  other  churches,  yet  the  proportion  strongly  holds,  that  if  there 
be  ordinary  cause  of  such  collections  in  every  particular  church, 
these  collections  should  be  made  ihe  first  day  of  the  week,  much, 
more  carefully  and  religiously  for  the  poor  of  one's  own  church ; 
and  tliat  in  all  the  churches  of  Christ  Jesus  to  the  end  of  the 

3.  The  apostle  dolh  not  limit  them  thus  with  wishes,  and 
counsels  only  to  do  it  if  ihey  thought  most  meet,  but  ilonep 
Miuia.  (ver,  1,)  OS  1  have  ordained,  or  instituted ;  and  therefore 
binds  their  consciences  to  it ;  and  if  Paul  ordained  it,  certainly 
he  had  it  from  Christ  Jesus,  who  first  commanded  him  »o  to 
appoint  it ;  who  profesaeth  that  what  he  had  received  of  the 
Lord,  that  only  he  cominiinded  unto  ihem  to  do,    (1  Cor.  xi.  13.) 

4.  If  this  day  had  not  been  more  holy  and  more  fit  for  this 
work  of  love  than  any  other  day,  he  durst  not  have  limited  them 
to  this  day,  nor  durst  he  have  honored  this  day  above  any  other 
in  the  week,  yea,  above  the  Jewish  seventh  day.  For  we  see 
the  very  apostle  tender  always  of  Christian  liberty,  and  not  to 
bind  where  Ihe  Lord  leaves  his  people  free;  for  thus  doing  he 
should  rather  make  snares  than  laws  for  churches,  (t  Cor.  vii. 
27,  3.i,)  and  go  expressly  against  his  own  doctrine,  (Gal.  v.  1,) 
who  bids  them  "  stand  fast  in  their  liberty,"  and  that  in  this  very 
point  of  the  observation  of  days.  (Gal.  iv.  10.)  But  what  fitness 
was  there  on  this  day  for  such  a  service  ?    Consider  therefore,  — 

5.  That  the  apostle  dolh  not  in  this  place  immediately  appoint 
and  institute  the  Sabbath,  but  supposeth  it  lo  be  so  already,  (as  Mr. 
Primrose  is  forced  to  acknowledge,)  and  we  know  duties  of 
mercy  and  charity,  as  well  as  of  necessity  and  piety,  are  Sabbatb 

r  '  THE    CHANGE    OF    TITK    SABBATH.  209 

duties ;  Tor  wliich  end  this  diij  (nhich  Beza  linds  in  an  nncient 
manuscript  lo  be  called  the  Lord's  diiy)  was  more  fit  for  those 
collections  tliaii  any  other  day ;  partly  because  ihcy  usually 
'  net  together  piihticly  on  this  day,  and  so  their  collectioDS  might 
1  greater  readiness  against  Paul's  coming ;  partly,  also, 
I  tbat  they  might  give  more  liberally,  at  least  freely,  it  being  sup- 
I  posed  that  upon  this  day  men's  hearts  are  more  weaned  from 
I  the  world,  and  are  warmed,  by  the  word  and  ordinances,  with 
re  lively  faith  and  hope  of  belter  things  to  come,  and  there- 
),  having  received  spiritual  things  from  the  Lord  more  plcnli- 
I  lully  on  this  day.  every  man  will  be  more  free  to  impart  of  bis 
I  tempontl  good  things  therein  for  refreshing  of  the  poor  saints, 
d  the  very  boweU  of  Christ  Jeans.  And  what  other  reason 
n  he  given  of  limiting  this  collection  to  this  day  I  confess  I 
ti  Dot  honestly  (though  I  could  wickedly)  imagine.  And  cer- 
I  tatnty  if  this  was  the  end,  and  withal  the  Jewish  day  was  the 
lOiristian  Sabbath,  the  apostle  would  never  have  thus  limited 
I  them  to  this  day,  nor  honored  and  exalted  this  first  day  before 
r  that  Jewish  seventh ;  which  if  it  had  been  the  Christian  Sab- 
I  tpth,  had  been  more  lit  for  such  a  work  as  this  than  the  first 
I  i*y  (if  A  working  day)  could  be. 

t '  6.  Suppose  therefore  that  ibis  apostolical  and  divine  institution 
tlv  lo  give  their  collections,  but  not  to  institute  the  day,  (as  Master 
■primrose  pleads ;)  suppose  also  that  ihey  were  not  every  Lord's 
Viay  or  first  <)ay,  but  sometimes  upon  the  first  day ;  suppose  also 
krdut  they  vrere  extraordinary,  and  for  the  poor  of  other  churches, 
ntbiue  for  that  time  only  of  their  need ;  suppose  also 
|,AaI  no  man  is  enjoined  to  bring  into  the  public  IrciLsury  of  the 
ihurch,  but  {i«li   laiiiia   iifc'ibi)   privately  to  lay   it   by   on   this 

■  jlliy  by  himself,  (as  Mr.  Brabouni  urgt'lh  against  this  text.)  yet 
■tiU  the  question  remains   uniuiswcrcd,  viz.;    Why  should  the 

OKtle  limit  them  to  this  day  ?     Either  for  exintordinary  or  pri- 
lu  collections,  and  such  special  act*  of  mercy,  unless  the  Lord 
'  liAd  honored  this  day  for  acts  of  mercy  (and  much  more  of 
piety)  above  any  other  ordinary  and  common  day  ?     What  then 
could   this  day  be   but  the  Christian  Sabbath  imposed  by  the 
iipustles,  and  magniQed  and  honored  by  all  the  churches  in  those 
L  wys?     I  know  there  are  some  other  replies  made  to  this  scrip- 
L^tom  by  Mr.  Brabourn ;  but  tliey  are  wind  eggs  (as  Plutivrch  calls 
Vthitt  philo»opher'i  notions,)  and  have  but  little  in  them ;  and  there- 
More  I  pnss  litem  by  as  I  do  many  other  things  in  that  book  as 
K^  worth  the  time  lo  name  ihcm. 

■  7.  This,  U<>tly.  I  add.  thi^  fir^t  day  was  thus  honored  either  by 
Ettrlne  or  human  institution ;  if  by  divine,  we  have  what  we 
I  18* 


plead  for  ;  if  b;  human  custom  nnd  traililion,  then  tbe  apostle 
assuredly  would  never  have  commendeil  the  ohiiervation  of  this 
daj,  who  elsewhere  condemns  Ilie  observation  of  daya,  though 
the  days  were  formerly  by  divine  insiitulion.  "TeobBer\e,"8aith 
he,  "days  and  limes;"  and  would  he  theti  have  commt^nded  the 
observation  of  these  diiya  above  any  other  which  are  only  by 
human,  but  never  by  divine  institution?  It  is  strange  thnl  tlie 
churches  of  Gabtia  are  forbidden  [he  observation  of  days,  (Gal. 
iv.  10,)  and  yet  commanded  (1  Cor.  xvi.  1,  2)  a  more  sacred 
and  solemn  observation  of  the  lirst  day  of  the  week  rather  than 
any  other.  Surely,  this  could  not  he,  unless  we  conclude  a 
divine  institulion  liereof.  For  we  know  how  zealous  the  holy 
apostle  is  every  where  to  strike  at  human  customs,  and  there- 
fore could  not  lay  a  stumbling  block  (to  occasion  the  grievous 
fall  of  churches)  to  ullow  and  command  them  to  observe  a 
human  tradition,  and  to  honor  this  above  the  seventh  day  for 
such  holy  services  as  are  here  made  mention  of.  But  whether 
this  day  was  solemnly  sanctified  as  the  Sabbath  of  tlie  Lord  our 
God,  we  come  now  to  inquire. 

TAesii  37.  In  the  third  Lest,  (Rev.  i.  10,)  mention  is  mnde 
of  the  Lard's  day,  which  was  ever  accounted  the  Grst  day  of  ihe 
week.  It  seems,  therefore,  to  he  the  Lord's  day,  and  conse- 
quently the  Sabbath  of  tlie  Lord  our  God.  Two  things  are 
needful  here  to  be  considered  and  cleared :  — 

1.  That  tliis  day  being  culled  the  Lord's  day,  it  is  therefore 
set  apart  and  sanciiHed  by  the  Lord  Christ  as  holy. 

2.  That  this  day  thus  sanctified  is  the  first  day  of  the  week, 
and  therefore  that  first  day  is  our  holy  or  Sabliaib  day. 

77iftit  38.  The  Grst  diiBcutty  here  to  prove  and  clear  up  is, 
that  this  day,  which  is  here  called  the  Lord's  day,  is  a  day  ineli- 
tuied  and  sunctiRed  for  the  Lord's  honor  and  service  above  any 
other  day.  For,  as  Ihe  tiacrament  of  bread  and  wine  is  called 
the  Lord's  supper,  and  the  Lord's  table,  for  no  other  reason  but 
because  they  were  instituted  by  Christ,  and  sanctified  for  him 
and  his  honor,  bo  what  other  reason  can  be  given  by  any  Scrip- 
tare  light  why  this  is  called  the  Lord's  day,  but  because  it  was 
in  the  like  manner  instituted  and  sanctified  as  they  were?  Mr. 
Brabourn  here  shifts  away  from  the  light  of  this  text,  by  afKrm- 
ing  tfaEkt  it  might  be  called  the  lord's  day  in  respect  of  God  the 
Creator,  not  Christ  the  Redeemer,  and  therefore  may  be  meant 
of  the  Jewisli  Sabbath,  which  is  called  the  Lord's  holy  day.  (Is, 
Iviii.  3.)  But  why  might  he  not  as  well  say,  that  it  Li  called  the 
Lord's  supper  and  table,  in  respect  of  God  tlie  Creator,  consider- 
ing that  in  tbe  New  Testament,  since  Christ  ii  actually  exolted 

THE   CUJlSGF.    of   THE   SABBATH. 

I'te  be  Lord  of  all,  this  phrase  is  only  applied  to  the  Lord  Christ 

las  Redeemer?     Look,  Ujeruf'ore,  as  Ihe  Jewish  .Sabbaih,  being 

E«Klled  the  Lonl'i:  Subbatli.or  the  SubbnUi  of  Jeho\-nh,  is  hy  that 

Stie  and  note  certainly  known  to  be  a  day  aanetilied  by  Jeho- 

<^Kh,  aa  Creator,  so  this  day,  being  called  the  Lord's  day,  is  by 

■rtainly  known  b)  be  a  day  sanctified  by  our  Lord 

esus,  as  Redeemer.     Nor  do  I  find  any  one  distinct  thing  in  all 

e  Scripture  whii;h  balh  the  Lord's  superscription  or  name  upon 

I,  (aa  the  Lord's  temple,  the  Lord's  offerings,  the  Lord's  people, 

!  Lord's  priests,  etc.,)  but  it  is  sanctified  of  Grod  and  holy 

m.    Why  is  not  this  day,  then,  holy  to  the  Lord,  if  it  equally 

I  the  Lord's  name?     Master  Primrose,  indeed,  puts  us  off 

■  %itb  ftnolher  shift,  viz.,  that  this  day  being  called   so  by  the 

fiAureh's  customs,  John,  therefore,  calls  it  so  in  respect  of  that 

t  which  the  church  then  used,  without  divine  instilulJon, 

(ot  why  may  not  he  as  well  say  that  he  calls  it  the  Lord's  table 

[|d  respect  of  the  church's  custom  also  ?     The  designation  of  a 

Klifty,  and  of  the  fimt  time  in  the  day  tor  holy  public  s 

PtBdeed,  in  the  power  of  each  particular  church,  (i 

eture,  and  the  hours  of  Sabbath  meetings ;)  but  the  sanctifica- 
n  of  a  day,  if  it  be  divine  worshi|i,  to  observe  it  if  God  com- 
1  and  appoint  it,  then  surely  it  is  will  worship  for  any  hn- 
Bian  custom  to  institute  iL  Now,  the  Lord's  name  being  stamped 
npon  this  day,  and  so  set  apart  for  the  honor  of  Christ,  it  can 
not  be  that  so  it  should  be  called  in  respect  of  the  church's  cus- 
i  for  Rurely  then  they  should  Iiave  been  condemned  fur  will 
rarship  by  some  of  the  apostles ;  and  therefore  it  is  in  respect 
t  the  Lord's  ineliiution  hereof. 

7%«tiJ  39.     The  second  dilltculty  now  lies  in  clearing  up  this 

'rticular,  tiz..  that  this  day,  thus  sanctified,  was  the  first  day  of 

t  week,  which  ia  therefore  the  holy  day  of  the  Lord  our  God, 

1  consequently  the  Christian  Sabbath:  for  tliis  purpose  let 

M  ensuing  particulars  be  laid  together. 

I.  That  this  day  of  which  John  speaks  is  a  known  day,  and 

was  generally  known  in  those  days  by  this  glorious  name  ot'  the 

Lurd^  day,  and  therefore  the  apostle  gives  no  other  title  to  it 

but  ihu  Lord's  day,  as  a  known  day  in  those  times ;  for  the  scope 

't  down  the  day  and  t 

e  of  it,  I. 


the  n 

e  credit  to 

B  certainty  of  it,  when  every  one  sees  the  truth  c 
m!,  and  they  bear  of  the  particular  time ;  and  it  may  seem 
it  absurd  to  set  down  the  day  and  time  for  such  an  end,  and 

it  particularly  known. 

1  day,  what   day  can   it  b«   ntber  by 


■  LordU 
^1  wrath  0 

■  encebe 

evidence  of  Scripture,  or  anj  antiquity,  but  the  first  daj  of  (W 
week  ?     For,  — 

1.  There  is  no  other  Asj  on  which  mention  is  made  of  anj 
other  work  or  action  of  Christ  which  might  oc«i.iion  a  holy  daj*. 
but  only  this  of  the  resurrection,  which  ig  esactly  noted  of  all 
the  evangeltsta  to  be  upon  the  first  day  of  the  week,  and  bj 
which  work  lie  is  expccssty  said  to  have  all  power  given  him  in' 
heaven  and  earth,  (Malt,  xxviii.  18.)  and  to  be  actually  Lord  of 
dead  and  living,  (Bom.  siv.  9  ;)  and  therefore  why  should  any 
other  Lord's  day  be  dreamed  of?  Why  should  Master  Braboum 
imagine  that  this  day  might  be  some  superatiiious  Easier  day, 
which  happens  once  a  year  ?  the  Holy  Ghost,  on  the  contrary, 
not  setting  down  the  month  or  day  of  the  year,  but  of  the  week 
wherein  Christ  arose,  and  therefore  It  must  be  meant  of  a  weekly 
holy  day  here  called  the  Lord's  day. 

2.  We  do  not  read  of  any  other  day  besides  this  first  day  of 
the  week,  which  was  observed  for  holy  Sabbath  duties,  and  hon- 
ored above  any  other  day  for  breaking  of  bread,  for  preaching 
the  word,  (which  were  acts  of  piety,)  nor  for  collections  for  the 
poor,  (the  most  eminent  act  of  mercy:)  why.  then,  should  any 
imagine  any  other  day  to  be  the  I^ord's  day,  but  that  first  day? 

8.  There  seems  to  be  much  in  that  which  Beza  observes  out 
of  an  ancient  Greek  manuscript  wherein  that  first  day  of  the 
week  (1  Cor.  xvi.  2)  is  expressly  called  the  Lord's  day ;  and  the 
Syriac  translation  saiih  that  their  meeting  together  to  receive 
the  sacrament  (1  Cor.  xi.  30)  was  upon  the  Lord's  day;  nor  is 
there  any  antiquity  hut  expounds  this  Lord's  day  ol"  the  first  day 
of  the  week,  as  learned  Givet  makes  good  against  Gomarus, 
professing  that  Quatquot  inlerprelei  kactenut  foruni,  h<rc  verha 
de  die  Teturrertionii  Domini  intellexerunt ;  toltu  quod  quidem 
leiam,  CI,  D.  Gomarvs  eontradixit, 

4.  Look,  as  Jehovah's  or  the  Lord's  holy  day  (Is.  Iviii.  13) 
was  the  seventh  day  in  the  week  then  in  use  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, so  why  should  not  this  Lord's  day  be  meant  of  some 
seventh  day,  (the  first  of  seven  in  the  week  which  the  Lord  ap- 
pointed, and  the  church  observed  imder  the  New  Teslameol,)  and 
therefore  called  {as  that  was)  the  Lord's  day  ? 

5.  There  can  be  no  other  clay  imagined  but  this  to  be  the 
Lord's  day.  Indeed,  Gomarus  affirms  that  it  is  called  the  Lord's 
day,  becaune  of  the  Lord  Jesus'  apparition  in  vision  to  John ; 
and  therefore  he  leils  thai,  in  Scripture  phrase,  the  day  of  the 
Lord  is  such  a  day  wherein  the  Lord  manifests  himself  chher  in 
wrath  or  in  favor,  as  here  to  John.     But  there  is  a  great  differ* 

between  those  phrases  i  the  Lord's  day,  and  the  day  of  the 


THE   CHAXGE    OF   THE   3 

For  such  an  inlerprelatiot 
1  uiicert&in  time,  is  directly  c 

I^i-i),  nhich  it  id  not  called  h 
the  Lord's  day,  as  if  it  was 
to  the  scope  of  John  in  setting  down  this  vision,  who.  t 
BMire  credit  to  it,  tells  us,  tirst,  of  tbe  person  Ibat  s 
John.  —  (Rev.i.9;)  secondly,  ibe  particular  place,  in  Fatmos; 
tfairdly,  ilie  particular  time,  the  Lord's  day. 
These  coiiiuderalions  do  Utterly  subvert  Mr.  Brabonm's  dis- 
course, to  prove  the  Jewish  Sabbath  to  be  the  Lord's  day,  which 
«e  are  still  to  obi^crve,  and  may  be  sufficient  to  answer  the  scru- 
ples of  modes!  and  humble  minds ;  for,  if  we  ask  tbe  time  of  it, 
tt  is  oa  (be  first  day  of  ihe  wet^k.  Would  we  know  whether  thia 
time  was  spent  in  boly  duties  and  Sabbath  services  ?  This  also 
bath  been  proved.  Would  we  know  whether  it  was  sanctiticd 
Ibr  that  end?  Yes.  verily,  because  it  is  culled  tbe  Lord's  diiy, 
and  consequently  all  servile  work  wrk  and  is  lo  be  laid  aside  in 
it.  Would  wc  know  wiietber  it  is  the  Christian  Sabbath  day  ? 
Verily,  if  it  be  the  day  of  the  Lord  our  God,  (ibe  Lord's  day,) 
why  is  it  not  the  Sabbath  of  the  Lord  our  God?  If  it  be  ex- 
alted and  honored  by  the  apostles  of  Christ  above  the  Jewish 
Sabbath  for  Sabbath  duties,  why  should  we  not  believe  but  that  it 
was  our  Sabbath  day?     And  although  the  words  Sabbath  day,  or 

>Hvt»th  dag,  be  not  espressly  meniioned,  yet  if  they  be  for  sob- 
Mwice  in  ibis  day,  and  by  just  consequence  deduced  from  Scrip- 
Mre,  it  is  all  one  as  if  the  Lord  had  expressly  called  them  so. 
TTittit  41*.  Hence  therefore  it  follows,  that  although  this  par- 
ticular scvenlli  day,  which  is  the  first  ofsei'en,  be  not  particularly 
pade  mention  of  in  the  fourth  commandment,  yet  the  last  of  seven 
being  abrogated,  and  this  being  instituted  in  its  room,  it  ie  there- 
fore lo  be  perpetuated  and  observed 'in  its  room.  For  though  it 
be  true  (as  Mr.  Urabourn  urgetli)  that  new  Jnslilulions  can  not 
be  founded,  no,  not  by  analogy  of  proporlioo,  merely  upon  old 
institutions,  as,  because  children  were  circumcised,  it  will  not 
follow  that  they  are  therefore  to  be  baptized,  and  so  because  the 

PJewB  kept  that  seventh  day,  thai  we  may  therefore  keep  ihe  first 
ifcy;  yet  this  is  certain,  that  when  new  things  are  insliluled  not 
kj  human  analogy,  but  by  divine  appointment,  the  application  of 
these  may  stand  by  virtue  of  old  precepts  and  general  rules,  from 
whence  the  application  even  of  old  insiiiutions  formerly  arose. 
For  we  know  that  the  ruiliu  iitttiliUut  in  the  New  Testament,  in 
ministry  and  sacrumenu,  stands  at  this  day  by  virtue  of  tbe  sec- 
ond commandment,  as  well  as  the  instituted  worship  under  tbo 
Old.  And  though  baptism  stands  not  by  virtue  of  the  institution 
of  drcumcisiuo,  yet  it  being,  de  novo,  instituted  by  Christ,  as  tbe 
•Mkl  of  initiation  into  Ciuisi's  mystical  body,  (1  Cor.  xiL  IS,)  it 


now  stande  by  virtue  of  tliat  general  rule  by  whicb  circnmcision 
ilaelf  was  adminislercil,  viz.,  ibat  Ibe  Beal  of  inilialion  inlo  Clirisl's 
body  be  applied  to  nil  the  visible  members  of  that  body ;  and 
faeoce  children  are  to  be  now  baptized,  as  once  they  were  cireum- 
cised,  being  members  of  Christ's  body.  So  the  first  daj  of  the 
week  being  instituted  to  be  the  Lord's  day,  or  Lord's  Sabbath, 
bcnce  it  follows,  that,  if  the  first  Ecvpnib,  which  is  now  abrogaied, 
was  ODce  observed  because  it  was  the  Lord's  Sabbath,  or  ibe 
Sabbath  day  which  God  appointed.  —  by  the  very  same  rule,  and 
on  the  very  same  ground,  wc  also  are  bound  to  keep  this  first  duy, 
being  also  the  Sabbath  of  the  Lord  our  God,  which  he  hath  now 
appointed  anew  under  the  New  Testament. 

Thetit  41.  It  is  true  that  some  of  the  primitive  cbarches,  in 
lh£  eastern  parts,  did  for  some  hundred  of  years  observe  both 
Sabbaths,  both  Jewish  and  Christian.  But  they  did  this  without 
warrant  from  God,  (who  allows  but  one  Sabbath  in  a  weeic,)  and 
also  against  the  rule  of  the  apostles  ;  for  I  think  that  Paul,  fore- 
seeing this  observation  of  days  and  Jewish  Sabbaths  to  be  stirring 
and  ready  to  creep  inla  the  church,  that  he  did  tberef(»«  condemn 
the  same  in  bis  Epislles  to  the  Galatinns  and  Colossiaus  ;  and  that 
therefore  Christian  emperors  and  councils,  in  after  tiroes,  did  well 
and  wisely  both  lo  condemn  the  observations  of  the  one  and 
withal  honor  tlie  other. 

Thexit  42.  Although  the  work  of  redemption  be  applied  unto 
few  in  respect  of  the  special  benefits  of  it,  yet  Christ,  by  bis 
death,  Is  made  Heir  and  Lord  of  all  things,  being  now  set  down  al 
the  right  hand  of  God,  and  there  is  mime  benefit  which  befalls  all 
the  world  by  Christ's  redemption ;  and  the  government  of  all 
things  is  not  now  in  the  hand  of  God  as  Creator,  but  in  the  hand 
of  a  Mediator,  (Heb.  i.  1,2;  ii.  8,9;  John  v.  22;  Col.  i.  16,  17; 
1  Tim.  iv.  10  ;  John  iii.  35;)  and  hence  it  is  no  wonder  if  all  men, 
aa  well  as  a  few  elected,  selected,  and  called,  be  commanded  to 
sanctity  the  Lord's  day,  as  once  they  were  the  Jewish  seventh 
day ;  the  work  of  Christ  being  in  some  respect  of  as  great  extent, 
through  all  the  work  of  creation,  as  the  work  of  .the  Father. 
And  therefore  it  is  a  great  feebleness  in  Mr.  Brabuuru  to  go 
about  lo  vilify  the  work  of  redemption,  and  extol  that  of  creation 
above  it ;  and  that  therefore  the  Sabbath  ought  still  to  be  kept  ia 
reference  to  the  work  of  creation,  which  concerns  all  men,  rather 
than  in  respect  of  redemption,  which  he  imagines  concerneth 
only  some  few. 

7»«m  43.  The  Lord  Christ  rested  from  the  work  of  re- 
dempiioo  by  price,  upon  the  day  of  bis  resurrection;  but  he  is 
not  yet  at  rest  from  the  work  of  redemption  by  power,  uulil  the 



day  of  oar  resurrection  and  glory  be  perfected.  But  it  doth  not 
hence  follow  (as  Mr.  Primrose  imagines)  that  there  is  no  Lord's 
day  instituted  in  respect  of  Christ's  resurrection,  because  he  hath 
not,  nor  did  not  then  rest  from  redemption  by  power ;  for  look, 
as  the  Father,  having  rested  from  the  works  of  creation,  might 
therefore  appoint  a  day  of  rest,  although  he  did  not,  nor  doth  not 
yet  rest  from  providence,  (John  v.  17,)  so  the  Lord  Christ 
having  finished  the  great  work  of  redemption,  he  might  justly 
appoint  a  day  of  rest,  although  his  redeeming  work  by  power 
wasyet  behind. 

Tnests  44.  The  heavy  and  visible  judgments  of  God  revealed 
from  heaven  against  profaneness  of  this  our  Lord's  day  Sabbath 
will  one  day  be  a  convincing  argument  of  holiness  of  this  day, 
when  the  Lord  himself  shall  have  the  immediate  handling  and 
pressing  of  it  Meanwhile  I  confess  my  weakness  to  convince  an 
adversary  by  it ;  nor  will  I  contend  with  any  other  arguments  from 
antiquity  for  the  observation  of  this  day ;  but  these  may  suffioOy 
which  are  alleged  from  the  holy  word. 


Tlnri*  1.  It  is  a  holj  labor  (saith  one)  to  inquire  after  the 
begioning  of  holy  rest.  The  Sabbath  can  not  be  ao  sweetly  mu)i>- 
tiSdd  unless  we  know  the  time  when  to  begin  and  end  it;  die  dif- 
ferent Apprehensions  of  such  aa  have  iaijuired  after  ihe  truth  in 
this  particular  have  made  way  fur  the  more  elenr  and  distinct 
knowledge  of  it,  it  being  the  privilege  of  trulli  to  be  more  puri- 
fied, and  ^hine  the  brighter,  by  passing  tlirough  tlie  heats  and 
fires  of  men's  contentions  and  disputatiune. 

77iesit  2.  There  being  tlierefore  five  Eeveral  opinions  con- 
cerning this  particular,  it  may  not  be  unuseful  to  bring  them  all 
to  the  balance  and  touchstone,  that  so  by  snufiixig  the  candle,  and 
rejecting  that  which  ia  false,  the  light  of  truth  may  shine  the 
brighter  at  lost. 

77ieiis  3.  Some  there  be  wlio  make  the  time  mutable  and 
TarioUB,  afflrmitig  that  God  hath  not  fixed  any  set  time,  or  that 
he  stands  upon  or  would  hare  hi«  people  troubled  with  eilch  nic&> 
ties  1  so  ioDg  OS  the  day  be  observed,  (say  they,)  it  is  no  matter 
when  it  be  begun  :  nor  do  they  make  this  variation  to  be  accord- 
ing to  that  which  God  aUowa,  (suppose  from  suu  to  sun,  sooner 
or  later,  as  the  lime  of  the  year  is,)  but  according  to  the  civil  cus- 
toms of  several  nations,  as  they  variously  begin  or  end  their  days 
among  whom  Ihey  live ;  as  suppose  they  live  among  Romans, 
they  think  they  may  begin  it  at  midnight ;  if  with  Babylonians, 
at  Bunrising;  if  among  Grecians,  at  suDset;  if  among  Umbriaiw 
and  Arabians,  at  midday. 

Thftia  4.  If  the  Scripture  hud  left  us  such  a  liberty  as  this, 
Tiz.,  to  measure  the  beginning  of  the  day  according  to  human 
custom,  a  scrupulous  conscience  (I  think)  might  have  a  moat  and 
ready  quieting  answer  here  ;  but  it  will  be  found  too  true,  that 
though  civil  and  common  lime  may  admit  of  such  variations  as 
may  best  suit  tvith  their  manner  and  occasions,  yet  sacred  and 
^_-  216 





holy  ti 

not  depcnilent  upon  human  customs,  but  upon  divine 
for  wliii:h  purpose  God  hath  macle  the  lights  of  heav-   ). 
en  to  be  for  seasons,  (Gen.  i.   14.)  lo  be  guides  and  helps  to 
be^n  and  end  ibe  seasons  and  days  whiuh  he  shall  appoint. 

7Tie$i*  d.  It  is  true  that  il  suits  not  with  God's  wisdom  (o 
determine  all  particular  circumstances  pf  things  (which  are  &1- 
mosi  innumerable  and  inHnite)  by  the  express  letter  of  the  Scrip- 
ture ;  and  therefore  he  hath  lefl  us  a  fen  general  rules  to  direct 
us  therein ;  yet  for  the  Lord  lo  leave  the  determination  of  some 
circumstances  to  human  liberty  would  he  very  perilous.  The 
ttimple  was  but  a  circumstance  of  place,  and  Eing  Uiziah,  in  offer- 
ing incense,  varied  only  in  a  circumstance  of  person ;  yel  we 
know  that  the  ten  tribes  were  carried  away  captive  for  not  sacri- 
ficing at  the  temple,  and  Uxziah  smitten  with  leprosy  till  big 
death  ;'  BO  the  Lord  havinff  determined  the  seventh  day  lo  be  his, 
what  now  should  hinder  but  that  he  should  determine  the  hegin- 
ning;  also  thoreof  ? 

Tlieii*  6.  If  God  hath  been  accurately  careful  to  fix  the  be- 
ginning of  other  feasts  and  holy  days,  far  inferior  unto  this,  a> 
appeareih,  Lev.  xxML  23,  Ex.  sii.  6,  why  should  we  think  thnt 
the  Lord  is  lens  careful  about  the  beginning  of  his  Sabbath  ? 

Tiieti$  7.  If  the  Lord  hath  not  left  it  to  human  wisdom  to 
act  down  the  bounds  and  limits  of  holy  places,  (as  appears  in 
the  temple,  tabernacle,  and  all  their  appurtenances,)  why  should 
think  that  he  hath  lefl  it  to  man's  wisdom  to  limit  and  deler- 

TTketit  8.  If  the  Lord  will  have  a  special  time  of  worship 
E  within  the  circle  of  seven  dayi4,and  not  appoint  the  lime  for 
beginning  and  end  of  it,  might  he  not  lose  much  of  the  beautf 
of  the  holiness  of  the  day,  evi^y  thing  being  beautiful  in  iu 
uuu  ?  Uay  not  man  begin  the  day  at  such  a  season  as  may  not 
beautiful  ? 

TTiait  ^.  The  deputation  of  time  for  holy  uses  upon  occasion 
nlkiwed  to  man ;  yet  ^anciiUcaiion  of  time,  and  to  set  the 
iiids  and  limits  of  it,  b  left  lo  no  man  ;  sonctificalion  not  only 
tive,  but  relative,  (as  here  in  llie  Sabhalh.)  l>eiog  as  proper 
the  Holy  Ghost  as  t^-eation  to  the  Father,  and  redempliou  to 
e  Son. 

ThtmlO.  Application  of  holy  time  to  the  [icrfurmance  of 
duties  on  the  Suhbtith  (as  to  lix  what  liours  lo  meet  in  upon 
.  day)  is  loft  to  human  prudence  from  general  rules  of 
oontcniency,  order,  comeliness  ;  but  consecration  of  constant  aid 
Hxcd  time  is  the  lord's  propriety,  not  only  of  the  middle,  but  «f 
th«  beginning  and  end  thereof. 

■  of  th 

vol-  lit. 



T^etit  11.  TKe  Scriptures  have  led  the  de  terra  i  nut  ion  of  tlittl 
beginning  of  the  S&bbalh  no  more  lo  civil  nations,  am)  their  cuftr 
toms,  than  to  particular  churches,  and  each  particular  person  ; 
for  they  may  all  equally  plead  against  the  Lord's  strktness  to 
any  exact  beginning  of  time ;  but  if  such  a  loose  liberty  were 
granted,  a  world  of  confusion,  scandal,  and  divieion  would  soon 
appear  ;  for  some  persons  might  llieu  begin  it  at  midnight,  soma 
at  midday  ;  some  might  measure  the  beginning  of  the  Sabbath 
according  lo  their  sleeping  sooner  or  later  on  the  Sabbath  day 
morning ;  some  migbl  be  plowing,  or  dancing  and  drinking, 
when  others  are  praying  and  hearing  of  the  word ;  and  who  could 
restrain  them  herein  ?  for  they  might  plead  [he  Sabbalh  is  not  yet  i 
begun  lo  them.  1 

7%e»is  12.  If,  therefore,  God  haih  Bnnctiticd  a  set  time,  he 
halli  set  and  sanctified  the  hounds  and  limits  of  that  time  ;  and 
to  begin  the  time  when  we  list,  it  may  sometimes  arise  from  weak- 
ness, but  usually  it  is  a  fruit  of  looseness  of  heart,  which  se- 
cretly loves  to  live  as  it  lists,  which  would  not  conform  to  God's 
rule,  and  therefore  will  crook  and  bend  the  rule  to  its  humcnv  . 
which  will  not  come  np  to  God's  lime,  and  therefore  make  God  ■ 
lo  come  down  to  theirs. 

TSmi*  13.  Others  there  be  who  give  God  the  honw  of  de- 
termining the  beginning  and  end  of  the  day,  but  they  cut  him 
short  of  one  half  of  it,  in  that  they  make  the  artificial  day,  or  the 
daylight,  from  sunrising  to  sunsetting,  to  be  the  day  of  his  Sab- 
bath. Thus  some  alGrra  downright.  Others  more  modestly  saj 
that  conscience  ought  not  to  be  scrupulous,  nor  trouble  itself,  if 
they  conscientiously  give  God  the  honor  of  the  Snbbaih  daylight, 
having  some  general  preparations  for  it  the  night  before,  and 
good  atfecliona  the  night  after. 

7%eii»  14.     But  if  the  daylight  be  the  measure  of  the  Sab*  I 
bath,  those  that  live  in  some  part  of  the  Uussia  and  East  land  ~l 
must  have  once  a  year  a  very  long  Sabbath,  for  then 
times  of  the  year  wherein  they  have  daylight  a  month  together. 

TTietit  15,  If  Glod  give  us  six  natural  days  lo  labor  in,  is  it 
not  fit  that  the  seventli  day  should  bear  an  equal  proportion  with 
every  working  day  ?  And  thcretbre  it  is  not  an  artiiicial,  but  a 
natural  day,  conaisling  of  twenry-four  hours,  which  we  must  i 
conscience  allow  unto  God  lo  be  the  Sabbalh  day. 

TTtetit  16.  It  is  true  that  tlie  night  is  given  to  man  to  rei 
in,  it  being  most  fit  for  that  end  ;  but  it  is  not  necessary  that  bB  > 
the  weekly  nights  be  spent  in  sleep,  for  we  then  do  labor,  and 
God's  providence  puts  men  generally  upon  it  lo  tabor  in  their 
callings  early  and  lute  those  nights,  and  Uie  Lord  allows  iti  nay, 










it  would  be  fiin  nni]  iillRiiess  ia  many  not  lo  do  it ;  besides  that 
rieep  niitl'  re^t  wliii-li  ix  lo  be  taken  in  fhe  niglit,  it  is  in  ordiae, 
or  in  refereni-e  lo  day  labor,  and  ia  as  a  whet  thereunto ;  and  ia 
thia  revpeot  the  whole  weekly  night,  as  well  as  the  day.  is  fur 
labor;  as  the  sleep  we  take  on  Habbaih  night  b  in  orrfine,  or 
with  respect  to  spirilunl  rest,  and  so  that  whole  natural  day  is  a 
^y  of  gpirilual  rest.  It  ie  therefore  a  vain  thing  for  any  to 
make  the  nights  of  the  six  working  days  to  be  no  part  of  the 
flix  working  days,  because  (they  gay)  they  are  given  lo  man  to 
rest  and  fleep  in :  for  upon  the  same  ground  they  may  make 
the  artificial  days  no  days  of  labor  neither,  because  there  must 
be  ordinarily  some  lime  taken  out  of  them  to  eat,  drink,  and  re- 
fresh our  weak  bodies  in. 

7^1*  17.  If  Nehcmiah  shut  the  gates  of  the  city  when  it 
began  to  bo  dark,  lest  that  nighttime  should  be  profaned  by 
bearuig  burdens  in  it,  then  certainly  the  time  of  night  was  sane- 
tified  ot'  God  as  well  as  the  day ;  lo  say  that  this  act  was  but  a 
jnst  preparation  for  the  Sabbath  is  said  witliout  proof,  for  if  God 
allows  men  ais  days  and  nights  to  labor  in,  wliat  equity  can  there 
be  in  forhidiing  all  servile  work  a  whole  night  together  which 
God  hath  allowed  man  for  labor  ?  And  although  we  ought  lo 
■uke  preparation  for  the  Sabbath,  yet  the  time  and  measure  of  it 
ii  left  to  each  man's  Christian  liberty  ;  but  for  a  civil  ma^strate 
to  impose  twelve  hours'  preparation  for  the  Subbath  is  surely 
bdth  against  Christian  liberty,  and  God's  allowance  al«o.  Again : 
Hebeiniah  did-  this,  lest  the  men  of  Tyre  should  occasion  the 
/ewi  to  break  the  Sabbath  day  by  bringing  in  wares  upon  that 
■jgbt;  M  as,  if  that  night  therefore  had  not  been  part  of  the 
8<Uibath,  they  could  not  thereby  provoke  the  Jews  to  profane 
the  Sabbtitb  day,  by  which  Nehemiah  tells  them  they  had  pro- 
voked ihe  wrain  of  God. 

7A««t'«  18.  A  whole  natural  day  is  called  a  day,  though  it 
take  in  the  night  also,  because  Ihe  daylight  is  the  chieft-st  and 
bci^t  ]iart  of  tlie  day,  and  we  know  that  lite  denomination  of 
tilings  is  usually  according  to  the  better  part ;  but  for  Mr.  Bra^ 
bourn  10  affirm  ibat  the  word  dag,  in  Scripture,  is  never  taken 
but  for  the  artificial  day,  or  time  of  light,  is  utterly  false,  as  might 
appear  from  sundry  instances  ;  it  may  sufBce  to  see  a  cluster  of 
•even  days  which  comprehended  their  nights  also.  (Ex.  lii.  15, 
18,  10,  41,  42.) 

Thttit  19.  To  affirm  that  the  Sabbath  day  only  comprehends 
(lis  daylight,  because  ibe  first  day  in  Gen.  i.  began  with  morning 
light,  it  tiot  only  a  bad  consequence,  (Buppo:iing  the  ground  of  it 
Co  be  true,)  but  the  ground  and  foundation  of  it  is  as  cerlaiol/ 




no  thk  Br.Gi.N.viNG  of  the  SAniiATEt. 

false  B8  lo  say  that  ilnrkncis  id  light :  for  it  is  eviJent  tfiiU  iLb^ 
flrsl  daj  in  Genesis  bcgnn  wiih  ihal  ilnrkne^s  wliicb  God  eaOvI 
night,  (P&  ir.  5.)  and  lo  AlGrm  ikni  tiie  lirsi  day  in  Gen.  if.M 
begins  with  morning  light  is  as  grossly  fal^e  as  it  is  apparently  t 
true  that  within  sii  days  tbe  Lord  made  heaven  and  earth.  (Ex.  I 
XX.  II ;)  for  before  the  creating  of  that  light  which  God  calls  1 
day,  the  heavens,  and  with  ihem  the  angels,  and  the  earth,  0^9 
first  matl«r  called  liie  deep,  which  was  overspread  with  darknem;  1 
were  erealet).     Either  therefore  the  l«rd  did  not  create  iIib  J 
world  in  six  days,  or  it  is  untrue  that  the  first  day  in  Generis 
began  with  morning  light;  and  I  wonder  upon  what  grounds  this 
notion  should  enter  into  any  loaii's  head;  for  though  God  calls 
the  light  day  and  the  darkness  night,  (as  we  shall  do  when  we 
speak  of  the  artificial  day,)  yet  withal  he  called  the  evening  of 
the  rooming  the  tirsi  day  ;  and  what  was  this  evening  and  mom- 
ingp     Surely  it  is  all  that  space  of  time  wherein  the  Lord  did 
his  first  day's  work  :  now,  it  is  evident  that  part  d'  the  first  day'a 
work  was  before  God  created  the  light;  and  what  ihoogh  evening    , 
be  oftentimes  taken  for  tbe  latter  piart  of  the  daylight?     y< 
is  too  well  known  to  those  who  have  waded  the  deep  in  this  < 
troversy,  that  it  is  oftcntiincB  taken  not  only  for  tbe  bound  b^  * 
tween  light  and  darkness,  i.  e^  the  end  of  tight  and  heginoing   ' 
of  darkness,  (Josh.  x.  26,  27  ;  Ps.  civ.  23,)  but  also  for  the  whola 
time  of  darkness,  as  it  is  here  in  this  first  of  Genesis,  and  oa  we 
shall  prove  in  due  jilaee ;  and  therefore  to  affirm  that  (he  He- 
brew word  used  by  Moses  for  evening,  not  to  be  nalurally  ap*    , 
pliable  to  the  night,  because  it  signifies  a  mixture  of  light  axA  I 
darkness  in  the  notion  of  it,  is  a  gross  mistake ;  for  the  Ilebrev] 
word  Giurtb  doth  not  signify  a  mixture  of  light  and  darknea^  J 
but  only  a  mixture,  because  it  is  the  beginning  of  darkness, 
wherein  all  things  seem  10  be  mixed  and  compounded  together,   ■ 
and  can  not  be  clearly  and  distinctly  discerned  in  their  kinds  and 
colors,  if  Buxtorfius  may  be  believed,  as  is  also  evident,  (Is. 
xxix.  15;)  and  lo  affirm  thut  the  day  is  before  tbe  night,  even  in 
thia  first  of  Genesis,  because  Moses  sometimes  sets  the  day  be- 
fore the  night,  it  may  seem  as  feeble  an  argument  as  to  say  that 
the  evening  is  before  the  morning,  because  Muses   here  sets  the 
evening  before  the  morning;  but  this  will  not  seem  rational  to 
ihem  who  make  the  evening  to  comprehend  the  latter  part  of 
the  daylight,  and  the  morning  the  first  part  of  it.     Lastly,  to 
make  the  light  to  begin  the  day,  because  the  lime  of  light  is  a   , 
principle  of  compulation,  (tbe  space  of  darkness  beforft  ■ 
that  light  was  created  being  unknown,)  is  all  one  as  if  one  sbould'l 
~        that  the  lime  of  daylight  was  not  tlie  beginning  o 


TIIi:   BEGraN» 


d>y,  because  llie  gpace  of  that  is  also  as  miicli  unknowu.  For 
if  we  know  tliat  darkness  was  before  light,  thoagli  we  may  not 
know  how  long  it  coDtinueil,  vet  we  do  know  certainly  that  the 
Aral  dny  began  with  darknen^s,  and  that  this  darkness  and  light 
made  op  the  space  of  twenty-four  hours,  or  of  a  natural  day, 
(as  in  all  olbor  days'  works  of  creation.)  and  which  is  sufilcieni 
to  break  down  thia  principle,  viz.,  that  the  first  day  in  Genesis 
began  with  morning  li^hL 

T%ent  20.     Some  say  the  Sabbath  is  significative  of  heaven, 

and  therefore  it  only  comprehends  the  daylight,  which  ia  St  to 

signify  the  lightsome  day  of  heaven,  which  darkness  is  not ;  but 

why  may  not  nighttime  signify  heaven  as  well  as  dayUme  ?  for 

'  besven  is  a  place  of  rest,  and  the  night  is  the  fittest  time  for 

'"rest,  aAer  our  weary  labors  in  the  day.     Who  teacheth  men  thus 

,   to  allegorize?     How  easy  a  thing  is  it  thus  to  abuse  all  the 

Scripture !     And  yet  sup|>ose  it  should  signify  heaven,  yet  why 

way  not  the  Sablnilli  continue  the  space  of  a  natural  as  well  aa 

of  an  artificial  day,  considering  that  the  natural  day  of  the  world, 

or  of  bolh-lieinispherea,  consists  only  of  light,  which  these  men 

ia  BigniHcative  of  heaven  ? 

'Vient  21.     We  may  and  do  sanctify  time  by  sleeping  on  the 

I    Saltbnlh  night,  as  well  as  by  showing  works  of  mercy  and  doing 

[  works  of  neee-ssity  upon  die  Suhbath  day,  or  as  we  may  do  by 

I  ming  and  drinking ;  for  to  lake  moderate  sleep  is  a  work  not 

I  only  of  necesHly,  but  also  of  mercy  to  ourselves  ;  and  therefore  to 

[  abolish  the  SabtMtli  night  from  being  any  {>art  of  the  Sabbath 

'ccause  we  can  not  (aa  some  think)  sanctity  time  by  sleeping,  no 

lore  than  by  working,  is  very  unsound. 

Tktsit  22.     Moses  indeed  tells  the  people,  (Ex.  xvi.  S3,)  that 

„  lo-morrow  is  the  Lord's  Sabbath ;  but  he  doth  not  say  that  the 

I  daytime  only  was  the  only  time  of  the  Sabhath,  or  that  the  day* 

l'  light  begins  and  ends  the  Sabbath;  but  he  mentions  that  lime, 

I  because  on  that  daylight  of  the  seventh  day  they  were  apt  and 

i  inclined  to  go  out  (as  in  other  days)  to  gather  manna,  and  so  to 

'  break  the  Sabbath  ;  and  it  is  as  it  we  should  say  to  one  who 

I  was  ready  to  ride  out  on  the  Sabbath  morning  about  worldly 

I  oceasious,  "  Do  not  stir  out,  for  to-morrow  ia  the  Sabbath  i "  tliat 

i>  we  may  hereby  prevent  the  breach  of  the  Sabbath  in  that 

Y  thing,  especially  at   that   Ume  wherein  one   ia   most   inclined 

[  to  to  do. 

Thftit  23.  To  imagine  that  the  Sabbath  most  be  contained 
L  within  the  bounds  of  daylight,  becauee  Christ  Jesos  arose  at  break 
[  of  d^y,  (Matt,  sxviii.  1.)  is  of  no  more  force  than  as  if  one  •heul4 



conclude  the  contRinment  of  it  within  llic  bounds  of  some  dark< 
ness  Hnd  ttrilight ;  for  it  ia  evident  thai  he  arose  about  that  time. 

TTtegig  24.  There  is  no  mora  necessity  of  sanctifying  a  day 
and  a  half,  by  beginning  the  day  at  evening,  than  by  beginning 
it  at  morning  lighi,  (for  thus  some  argue ;)  for  what  ia  said  of  iha 
evening  of  both  hemisphere!!,  that  the  second  evening  would  be- 
gin twelve  hours  after  the  first,  if  the  Sabbath  was  sanctified  to 
begin  at  the  evening  of  both  hemi^pherea,  and  so  there  would  be 
B  day  and  a  half  sanctified ;  the  like,  I  say.  may  be  averred  of 
the  morning,  supposing  tliat  both  hemispheres  ehould  begin  their 
Sabbath  at  the  morning  of  both  hemisplieres ;  but  we  know  that 
the  Sabbath  day  is  sanctified  to  begin  and  end  according  to  the 
setting  and  rising  aun  in  each  hemisphere  and  longitude  of  places 

y^ettt  25.  If  evening,  morning,  light,  and  night  made  up 
every  day  the  creation,  why  shall  we  think  but  that  ibe  Sabbath 
day  also  consisted  of  [he  same  parts  ?  and  if  the  whole  world  waa 
made  in  eix  days,  and  these  days  be  only  such  as  consist  of  day- 
light, when  tlien  was  (he  third  heaven  and  chaos  made  which  did 
exist  before  light  ?  Those  fathers  and  schoolmen  who  set  Euoh 
narrow  bounds  to  tbe  day  had  need  consider  of  it,  leat  their  an- 
_  swer  be  like  lua,  who  hearing  a  simple  preacher  desiring  lbs 
(XHitinuance  of  the  life  of  tlie  king  so  long  us  sun  and  moon  en- 
dured, and  being  asked,  if  that  should  he  so,  when  should  his  bob 
reign,  he  replied,  it  may  be  the  preacher  thought  that  he  might 
rule  by  candlelight. 

Tht$it  2ti.  Suppose  therefore  that  there  was  no  public  wor- 
ship in  the  temple  (as  one  objecteih)  among  the  .lews  in  ihs 
nighttime,  yet  it  will  not  follow  from  hence  that  the  Sabhath  was 
to  continue  no  longer  than  daylight  ;^  for  the  Sabliath  might  be 
Mociilied  privately  in  llie  night,  as  well  as  more  publicly  in  the 
day ;  and  thus  the  Jews  were  wont  to  sanctify  their  Sabbath, 
and  so  should  we.   (Is.  xkk.  29.    Ps.  Ixiii.  7 ;  xeii.  2,  3.) 

TTittit  27,  It  is  true  that  it  is  very  good  to  prepare  for  and 
end  the  SabbAih  with  holy  affoctions ;  yet  if  a  seventh  part  of 
weekly  time  be  due  to  God,  as  six  parts  of  it  are  due  to  us, 
through  llie  goodness  of  God.  then  let  God  be  glorified  as  God, 
and  the  whole  day  allowed  him  as  bis  day.  Let  Cicsar  have  his 
due.  and  God  his. 

Tkegit  28.  Others  allow  Ihe  Lord  hia  whole  time,  but  they 
think  that  he  hath  tixed  the  l>eginDing  of  it  at  the  gates  of  mid- 
night, "which  midnight  they  call  morning,  or  morning  midnight, 
or  midnight  morning,  and  therefore  they  imagine  qui  of  Gen.  i. 




the  morning  viaa  Imlf  night  wherein  lime  begun,  and  half 
4>7 :  six  hours  night  from  iniclnight  to  six,  and  six  hours  day 
from  six  to  midday ;  and  by  the  same  proportion,  the  evening  to 
be^n  at  midday,  and  so  to  conlinue  six  hour«  day  from  twelve 
to  six,  and  aix  hours  night  from  six  to  midnight ;  and  Iberelbre 
they  uy,  that  God  is  said  to  atrelch  the  north  upon  the  emply,~ 
(Job  xxvi.  7,)  because  tlie  first  beginning  of  the  notion  uf  lime 
began  from  the  north  point,  when  darkness  was  first  upon  ihe 
flee  of  the  deep,  and  from  this  north  point  in  the  revolution  of 
Uic  heavens  we  do  account  it  midnight,  as  bt-ing  opposite  lo  the 
)uth,  which  in  the  course  of  the  sun  is  at  midday  ;  and  therefore 
•1m>  they  say  that  evening  is  never  taken  in  all  the  Scripture 
Jtir  the  whole  nigbc,  but  as  evening  begins  at  midday,  so  morning 
begins  at  midnight." 

T^en't  29.     But  if  the  first  day,  and  consequently  the  Sabbath 

day,  should  begin  at  midnight,  it  were  meet  to  give  a  demoiistra- 

~'  in  that  this  first  darkness  should  continue  just  six  hours,  or  half 

e  lime  of  such  a  night  when  ilie  sun  is  in  the  equinoctial ;  but 

although  it  be  certain  Ihut  the  first  time  began  in  darkness,  yet  it 

b  whirilj  uncertain  whether  this  darkness  continued  but  six  hours. 

l-XHOchius  and  many  others  have  very  good  cards  to  show  that  ihii 

Srst  darkness  continued  a  complete  night  of  twelve  hours;  others,  ~ 

Ml  the  other  hand,  make  it  far  leas ;  certain  it  is,  it  continued  some 

■Onaiderable  space  of  time,  in  that  it  bath  the  name  of  niglil  put 

ion  it ;  bat  that  it  should  be  just  fix  hours,  neither  can  man's 

■son  demonstrate  it,  nor  haih  God  in  any  scripture  rvvenled  It, 

It  it  in  a  mere  uncertainty,  and  therefore  an  ill  foundation  for 

■tettling  Ihe  beginning  of  the  Sabbath  upon.  -— . 

Thtiit  SO.     Some  would  prove  the  Sabbath  to  begin  nt  mid-1 

Bight,  because  Christ  arose  at  midniglit,  and  he  arose  at  midnight  1 

^cuaee  Samson,   a  type  of  Christ,  carried  away  the  gales  of 

Oaxa  at  midnight,  (Judg.  xri.  3 ;)  but  such  allegorical  reasonings 

were  fit  tools  for  blind  monks  in  former  times  to  delude  the  aim- 

fie  p«ople  wiih.     I  suppose  men  are  wiser  now  than  to  l>e  fed 

irilh  wind  and  cluitr,  and  to  build  their  faith  upon  cozening  alle- 

yorie*  of  human  wit,  by  which  as  the  blind  monks  of  old  did  feud 

'^  people,  so  Ihe  Fnmilisla  now  deceive  the  world ;  both  which  ' 

n  the  fruila  uf  God's  heavy  curse  upon  their  hearts,  who,  because 

bey  did  not  lave  the  truth  to  feed  upon  it,  are  therefore  fed  wiih  \ 

saity  of  mind.  ■  -^ 

TJtetu  31.     It  is  Iruo  Paul  preached  till  midnight,  (Arts  xk. 

7,)  but  dolb  it  hence  follow  that  the  Sabbath  was  to  end  at  tnid- 

nigbti'     Mo,  verily,  for  the  beginning  and  end  uf  the  Sablialh  is 

•ot  BMUur«d  by  man's  preadiiug  a  longer  or  a  shonar  time. 


Paul  might  have  continued  preaching  lon^r  than  tlie  Sabbath, 
or  raidniglit,  ihe  case  being  exlratirdinarj  in  reepeci  of  his  depart- 
ure tlie  next  day,  never  to  see  tbeir  faces  moi-e ;  and  he  might 
have  continued  a  ehorier  time  than  the  Sabbath  continued,  as 
our  Saviour  himself  did  before  sunMil,  (Mark  i.  22,  32;)  for  the 
bounds  of  continuance  of  the  Sabbatii  are  not  set  according  to  the 
beginning  and  end  of  any  man's  preaching,  which  is  so  exceeding 
nnccrtain.  Paul's  long  sermon  was  not  ixHitinucd  and  ended  at 
midnight  purposely,  and  becau.'>e  so  long  the  Sabbath  continued ; 
but  occBdionully,  in  regard  of  his  final  departure  from  tliem  Ihe 
next  day :  and  hence  in  respect  of  this  extraordinary  cause  he 
continued  so  long  at  it,  which  in  ordinary  course  had  been  very 

TJiftit  32.  It  is  not  said  in  the  first  of  Genesis  that  the 
morning  and  the  evening  were  the  first  day,  as  if  the  day  sbould 
begin  at  morning  midnight:  but  the  evening  and  the  morning 
were  the  lirst  day ;  and  therefore  it  in  strange  that  any  should 
derive  the  beginning  of  the  Sabbath  from  morning  midnight  out 
of  this  texL  The  Grecians,  because  they  begin  the  day  at  the 
evening  of  eunseE,  did  therefore  orderly  call  their  natural  day 
(2  Cor.  xj.  25)  i-ux6^uf(/or-,  and  is  it  probable  that  Moses  would 
e|icak  disorderly,  rt  ordine  rttroffradtt,  here  ?  and  not  ralber 
according  to  llie  interpretation  of  Daniel,  who  calls  twenty-tbree 
hundred  days  by  name  of  Glinereb  liuier,  which  signifies  even- 
ingt,  momingt,  because  tite  evening,  not  the  morning,  much  less 
midnight  morning,  is  to  begin  the  day.  (Dan.  xiv.  26.) 

TTim*  33.  It  is  true  that  sometimes  those  things  which  are 
first  in  order  of  time  are  spoken  of  last  in  order  of  story ;  luul 
therefore  it  is  no  solid  argument  to  prove  that  the  evening  is  he- 
fore  the  morning,  merely  because  the  evening  is  set  down  first 
before  the  morning,  unless  it  can  be  proved  that  the  story  sets 
down  such  things  (and  so  Ibis  in  particular)  orderly  ;  which  I 
suppose  is  evident,  1.  Because  tlie  first  darkness  is  called  night, 
and  also  comprehends  llie  whole  time  of  night,  as  light  compre- 
hends the  whole  lime  of  the  day.  (Gen.  i.  4,  0.)  Now,  I  do  not 
find  in  oil  the  Scripture,  nor  is  any  man,  I  [hink,  able  to  show,  that 
the  whole  night  is  taken  for  the  morning ;  and  therefore  the  first 
darkness  could  not  possibly  begin  at  the  morning  or  midnight 
morning.  2.  Because  [he  scope  of  Moses  in  this  chapter  is  to  set 
down  not  only  the  work  of  creation,  hut  (be  exact  order  of  it,  and 
consequently  of  the  order  of  lirae,  which  was  consecrated  with 
the  world  ;  first  the  beginning  of  it,  then  the  succeiijion  and  vicis- 
"f  it,  first  in  the  dark  night,  then  i 

e  light  day. 

U  one)  firat  in  the  evening,  then  in  th«  moniing.     8. 

TlIK  Bl 

ilE    SABBATH. 

t cause  ihe  evening  may  be  the  end  of  tlie  artificial  day; 
.  I  know  no  prooi'  from  any  instance  in  Scripture  to  make 
It  ihe  eiwl  of  the  natural  day,  of  which  Moses  liere  Bpeaka ; 
and  therefore  as  evening  can  not  end  the  day,  so  midnight  morn- 
ing can  not  begin  it. 

TKnm  34.     To  aSirm   that  the  evening  ia  never  taken  in 

I  Scripture  for  the  whole  night,  and  that  therefore  by  the  evening 
we  are  to  understand  six  hours  day  and  six  hours  aighu  as  the 
Wnsequence  in  most  weak,  so  the  assertion  is  most  false,  as  may 
'•ppear  to  any  who  seriously  ponders  these  and  such  like  scrip- 
tares :  Hab.  i.  8  ;  Ps.  xuii.  2;  Jobvii.  4:  Deut.  xxviii.  6U,  C7 ; 
Zach.  xiv.  7  ;  Is.  xxi.  12. 
Thftit  35.  Nor  can  it  be  proved  that  the  evening  begins  at 
■aidday,  which  is  their  principal  argument  lo  prove  that  Ihe 
SDorning  begins  at  midnight. 

"Dietit  36.  For,,  though  it  be  said  (Ex.  xxix.  38,39; 
xii.  (i)  that  the  lamb  was  to  be  slain  between  the  two  evenings, 
(as  it  in  iu  the  Hebrew.)  yet  neither  these  or  any  sucli  scriptures 
are  able  tu  prove  that  one  of  those  evenings  must  necessarily 
begin  at  midday ;  but  only  this,  that  some  part  of  the  afler- 
nooa,  when  the  sun  was  in  his  declining,  was  one  of  these 
evenings :  some  of  tbe  Jewish  rabbins  begin  it  at  noon,  and  yet 
it  is  without  warrant  from  Scripture,  and  they  are  overwhelmed 
with  cross  testimonies  from  most  of  their  fellows,  who  bepn  it 
•ome  about  one,  some  about  two  of  the  clock  in  the  afternoon ; 

»Bnd  Joscphus,  (who  knew  best  his  countrymen's  manners.)  and 
who  is  one  of  most  credit  in  his  writings,  tells  us  that  ibey  began 
ttteir  first  evening  about  three  of  the  clock  in  the  afieraoon. 
JTiMit  37.  We  read  indeed  of  the  shadows  of  the  evening, 
(Jer.  vi.  4;)  but  it  dolb  not  hence  follow  that  the  evening  begins 
■t  midday,  but  rather  some  time  after  it,  the  shadows  of  the 
evening  being  the  shadows  of  the  day  declining,  which  therefore 
grow  long;   but  midday  is  no  time  of  declining  shadows. 

»7K#«t«  3d.  Although  tbe  evening  may  be  called  by  human 
cnstom  all  that  part  of  the  day  wherein  we  wish  men  good  even 
jroiB  noon  till  sunset,  yet  it  is  ilien  called  the  evening  in  rt'Spect 
of  the  ariilieial,  not  natural  day,  of  which  Moses  speaks  when  he 
divides  the  day  into  morning  and  evening,  part  of  which  after- 
noon is  also  called  evening  by  the  Iloty  Ghost  in  Scripture; 
because  it  is  either  appronching  or  hasting  loward  the  evening 
of  the  natural  day,  or  contiguous  lo  it ;  even  as  part  of  a  dark 
right  ia  aumetimea  called  morning,  because  it  is  either  contiguous 
or  not  far  from  the  morning  light,  and  men  are  then  usually  up, 
■pd  pniNuiiig  for  it. 






Thftit  3Q.  And  hb  no  text  can  Iw  produced  lo  prore  Ibat 
tbe  evening  begins  ai  midday,  eo  neiiber  can  an;  be  alleged  to 
prove  ibc  morning  to  begin  at  mtdniglit;  the  Scripture  (speak- 
ing properly)  putting  an  enpress  difftrence  belween  midnight, 
coult -crowing,  and  morning.  (Mark  xiii.  35.) 

Tlietii  40.  And  llierefore  to  translate  llie  words  in  Gen 
So  wag  the  evening,  so  was  the  morning  the  first  day  :  and  then 
and  this  gloss  and  interpretation,  viz.,  that  out  of  the  premises 
of  night  and  day,  so  was  the  evening  mixed  of  tliem  both ;  fO 
vias  the  morning  also  compounded  of  both,  to  wii,  of  ni 
and  light ;  this,  I  say,  is  but  words ;  here  is  no  proof  for  such  en 
interpretation.  Junius's  translation  is  best  and  most  clear,  and 
rntional,  viz.,  So  was  the  evening  and  the  morning  of  the  first 
da^;  for,  as  hath  been  said,  the  whole  time  of  night  ia  never 
called  by  the  name  of  morning;  let  any  roan  show  the  least  tittle 
in  any  scripture  of  it,  and  I  will  yield  to  them  in  this  cause. 

T/iriu  41.  To  affirm  that  the  division  of  the  natural  day 
(Gen.  i.)  into  day  and  uight  was  for  civil  use,  and  into  evening 
and  morning  for  religious  use,  in  respect  of  the  evening  and 
morning  sacrilice,  a  long  time  aJ^r,  ie  Just  such  a  device  as  his 
who  would  needs  think  that  the  first  day  of  the  week  was  called 
/ila  auSSoioii-,  hecause  God  foresaw  and  ordained  the  change 
of  the  Sabbath  unto  that  first  day ;  for  we  know  God  speaks  of 
things  as  tbey  were  then  in  their  nature,  when  tbey  did  first 
exist,  Ijefore  sacrifices  were  thought  of;  Adam  called  the  names 
of  things  according  to  their  natures  and  special  use,  and  is  it 
credible  that  before  his  fall,  where  there  was  no  use  of  sacrifices, 
that  he  should  know  of  morning  and  evening  sacrifices,  in  which 
respect  it  was  called  evening  morning?  And  yet  suppose  it  was 
in  respect  of  religious  use  that  these  names  are  given  to  each 
day  ;  yet  why  must  not  the  evening  begin  the  day  rather  than 
the  morning  ?  it  being,  as  halh  been  proved,  lii'st  in  being  as  it 
is  first  in  naming. 

nmt  42.  It  is  true,  the  time  before  day  (Mark  i.  35) 
is  called  early  morning,  and  we  read  of  the  morning  watch 
before  daylight,  (Ex.  xiv.  24;)  yet  these  places  no  way  prove 
that  which  tbey  are  produced  for,  viz.,  that  morning  begins  at 
midnight;  that  Christ  went  to  prayer  at  midnight,  because  he 
went  to  it  in  the  early  morning,  or  that  the  morning  watch 
began  at  midnight;  for  we  know  it  was  some  time  after  it; 
these  places,  indeed,  show  thus  much :  that  some  time  before 
daylight  is  sometimes  called  morning,  which  is  readily  acknowl- 
edged in  the  respects  forementioned. 

Thttii    43.     The  angels  indeed  were  created  togather  with   , 


the  third  lieiiven,  (Gen.  i.  1,)  iu  ibe  beginning  of  lime;  for, 
being  incorruptible,  (as  tbe  third  heaven  is,)  they  could  not  be 
•fterwnrd  cretited  out  of  tbe  fit^^t  matter,  as  all  ibis  visible 
and  corruptible  world  was ;  therefore  the  earth  is  said  to  be 
dark  and  void,  (i.  e.,  of  all  inhabitants  and  beautiful  form,)  in 
opposition  to  ibe  third  heaven,  which  was  made  with  it,  which 
was  lightsome  and  full  of  inhabitants,  vie.,  the  angels;  and  if 
it  was  a  kin^om  prepared  from  the  foundation  of  llie  world, 
surely  Ibis  kingdom  had  a  king  then,  and  this  king  had  his  eub- 
jectd;  who  could  they  then  be  but  angels?  but  to  infer  from 
hence  that  this  lime  of  darkness,  wherein  tbe  angels  were  created, 
■liould  be  morning,  and  that  Ihereforo  they  are  called  by  Job  the 
morning  stars,  (Job  xxxviii.  6,  7,)  as  some  imaginej  will  follow 
no  more  than  as  if  one  should  affirm  that  the  King  of  Babel 
(called  Lucifer)  was  certainly  bom  in  the  morning,  because  be 
kIso  is  called  a  morning  star,  (Is.  xiv.  IS;)  for  vho  sees  not  but 
that  the  speech  is  metaphorical  in  both?  glorious  excellency 
above  others  being  bestowed  on  them,  as  special  brightness  and 
luster  b  given  to  the  morning  star. 

7%eiii  44.  Belshazzar  is  said  to  be  stuin  in  the  night,  (Obii. 
\.  30,)  which  the  prophet  Isaiah  boa  foretold  should  be  in  the 
morning,  (Is.  xlvii.  11 ;)  but  will  it  follow  hence  that  ihe  morn- 
ing is  the  lime  of  midnight  ?  Might  it  not  be  after  midnight  as 
well?  for  the  text  is  silent  ;  and  yet  I  do  not  think  thiU  the 
word  morning  in  Isaiah  is  meant  of  Enidnight,  nor  any  part  of 
any  night,  bui.  by  a  meiaphor,  the  apparent  time  of  tbe  beginning 
of  his  misery,  (the  light  of  the  morning  manifesting  all  things 
^purenlly,)  the  Lord  also  alluding  to  the  manner  of  human  judi- 
Mlures,  who  were  wont  to  pass  the  sentence  and  inflict  it  in  the 
norning,  as  the  Scripture  frequently  holds  forth. 

T^tit  45.  Though  also  it  be  Irue  that  the  Lord  smote  tbe 
Kgyptions  at  mldnighl,  and  ihat  ibe  Israelites  were  prohibited 
from  stirring  out  of  doors  till  morning,  (Ex.  ziL  22, 29, 30,)  and  yet 
that  they  did  itir  up  one  another  to  depart  before  morning 
light,  yet  it  will  not  hence  follow  (as  some  would  infer)  that 
raid.iight  was  ihe  beginning  of  their  morning;  for  then,  I.  They 
might  have  risen  at  midnight,  just  when  God  was  destroying  the 
Egyptians*  tint  bom,  for  that  was  part  of  the  morning  by  this 
account,  'i.  Tlicy  are  prohibited  from  stirring  out  of  doors  till 
morning,  as  of  themselves:  yet  if  God,  and  Fboraob,  and 
Muses  will  force  them  out,  there  is  no  rule  broken  by  stirring 
out  in  such  a  c»se  before  daylight  morning.  3.  It  is  more  than 
probable  that  there  was  some  good  «pac«v  after  midnight  before 
they  stirred  out,  which  is  said  to  be  in  the  morning  natch  ;  for 


m  S28 

'    Tile    SABUATH. 


(he  dealh  stroke  was  Htmiclniglil,  nfler  which  Fharnoh  and  his 
council  Diust  Bit  anil  consult,  and  conclude  what  lo  do,  and  send 
for  Mo^ea  ;  after  which  ihere  muBl  be  some  lime  for  Closes  to 
acquaint  the  Israelites  to  mnke  them  lit  and  ready  to  depart 
their  departure ;  therefore  "  in  the  morning  "  was  not  at  midnight 
which  began  this  morning.  4.  Pharaoli  sends  for  Mose«  after 
midnight;  yet  this  lime  is  called  night,  (Ps.  xxx.  31.)  auil  not 
morning;  and  indeed  properly  it  was  not  so,  only  called  so  hy 
an  improper  speech. 

T7ieti4  46.  When  Job  saiih  that  God  stretched  out  ihe  north 
upon  the  empty,  (Job  xxvi.  7,)  it  is  not  spoken  of  the  empty 
chaos,  for  Job  had  no  occasion  to  speak  thereof,  nor  is  it  his  scope ; 
but  of  the  places  near  the  north  pole  which  are  void  and  empty 
of  inhabitants,  none  being  able  now  to  dwell  in  that  frigid   zone. 

TAeiit  47.  If  God  hath  set  any  time  to  begin  the  Sabbath, 
surely  it  is  such  a  time  as  may  be  ordinarily  and  readily  known, 
(hat  so  here  (as  well  as  in  all  other  ordinances)  the  Sabbath  may  be 
begun  with  prayer,  and  ended  with  praise :  but  if  it  should  begin  at 
midnight,  what  man  of  a  thousand  can  readily  lell  the  certain  time 
when  it  begins,  that  so  they  may  in  a  holy  manner  begin  the 
Sabbath  with  God  ?  All  men  have  not  the  midnight  clocks  and 
bells  to  awaken  them,  nor  con  the  crowing  of  cocks  herein  give  a 
certiun  sound ;  a  poor  Christian  man  had  need  be  a  good  and 
watchful  mathematician  that  holds  this  opinion,  or  else  1  see  not 
how  he  will  know  when  midnight  is  come ;  and  if  he  can  not, 
then  it  is  very  considerable,  and  to  me  unquestionable,  that  that 
can  not  be  the  beginning  of  holy  time  which  can  not  be  begun 
in  a  holy  manner:  there  was  never  any  ordinance  of  God  but  it 
was  so  ordered  as  that  it  might  ordinarily  be  begun  and  ended 
with  God ;  wliich  makes  me  question  that  the  beginning  of  it  at 
moniing  midnight  can  not  be  of  God. 

TArtit  48.  Others  there  be  who  do  not  begin  the  Sabbath  at 
morning  midnight,  but  begin  and  end  it  at  morning  light,  at  the 
rising  of  Ihe  sun,  and  the  light  of  it ;  who  indeed  are  assisted 
with  better  proofs  and  stronger  arguments  than  any  of  ihe  rest, 
»nd  therefore  need  trial,  and  we  have  need  to  know  what  weight 
they  are  of ;  as  also  to  bo  accurately  wary  lest  the  nrle  of 
love  be  broken  Ipward  such  gracious  and  learned  servants  of 
'  God ;  considering  how  much  Ihey  have  to  say  in  this  point,  in 
which  case,  much  love,  rci^pect,  and  indulgence  hath  been  ever 
accounted  necessary  by  men  of  moderate  and  sober  minds, 

Tktfit  49.  The  six  working  days  being  considered  absolutely 
in  themselves,  in  this  re.«]iect  it  is  no  matter  whether  they  begin 
M  evening,  or  morning,  or  midnight,  or  midday  ;  nor  is  it  in  this 

I  begin  and  end  llie  days  according  lo  l]i«  custom 
n  where  we  live  ;  but  because  thew  days  are 
'  lo  be  considered  relatively  in  respect  of  the  seventh  day,  hence 
the  week  days  are  so  to  be  begun  as  that  their  relation  to  ilie 
seventh  be  not  disturbed,  so  as  that  tlie  bounds  and  limits  of  the 
Sabbath  be  not  impaired  or  iransj^ressed :  for  there  is  no  religious 
necessity  to  begin  snd  end  civil  lime  with  sacred  ;  nor  is  it 
so  uncomely  as  it  may  seem,  at  Hrst  bluah,  lo  give  God  and  Ciesor 
their  due  ;  civil  accounts  to  the  one,  and  sacred  to  the  other ; 
for  when  the  Jews  were  subdued  by  the  Romans,  tliey  might  and 
did  begin  their  reckoning  of  civil  time  as  the  Romajis  did,  and 
yet  reserve  the  bounds  of  sacred  time  wholly  unto  God.  They 
did  the  like  in  England  many  years  since,  saith  M.  Fox,  and  that 
their  civil  days  began  in  the  morning,  and  religious  days  in  the 
evening  ;  and  when  they  did  thus  variously  begin  their  days, 
there  was  no  suck  indecent  disproportion  of  times  as  Ber.  Mr. 
Cleaver  imagines,  in  the  like  case,  if  holy  time  should  not  begin 
with  morning,  wliich  he  pleads  for. 

TfitM  bo.  The  principal  foundations  of  this  opinion  are  the 
words  of  the  four  evangelists.  (Matt,  xiviii.  1.  Mark  xvi.  1,  2. 
Luke  xxiv.  1.  John  xx.  1,)  Among  all  of  which  that  of  KlalL 
xxviti.  1  hath  most  weight,  wherein  it  is  said.  "  In  the  end  of  the 
Sabbath,  as  it  began  lo  dawn  toward  the  Hrst  day  of  the  week," 
etc.,  from  whence  it  seems  to  follow,  that  if  the  Sabbath  day  did 
end  at  the  dawning  of  the  first  day  of  the  week,  thai  then  the 
dawning  or  the  daylight  of  the  first  day  must  be  the  beginning 
t  tilt!  Sabbath  day,  or  of  the  Christian  Sabbath. 
"Dttti*  bl.  The  consideration  of  this  scripture  hath  caused 
Be,  very  judicious,  (vii.,  Beza,  Junius,  and  others,)  who  con- 
nive the  Sabbath  to  I>egin  at  even,  to  allimi,  upon  very  proba- 
'  'a  grounds,  that  there  was  among  the  Jews,  at  this  lime  under 
r  RumNu  bondage,  a  double  account  and  reckoning  of  the  days 
the  week.  1.  Civil.  2.  Sacred  account.  According  lo  sa- 
I  account,  («ay  ihcy,)  the  church  of  God  began  their  Sab- 
h  at  evening,  not  morning,  which  they  demonstrate  i'rom  sun- 
y  pregnant  texts  in  the  Old  and  New  Testament ;  but  accord- 
g  to  the  civil  account  of  the  Romans,  who  gave  the  precedency 
(a  the  morning  before  the  evening,  they  l>egau  it  therefore  in  the 
morning,  and  according  to  this  latter  account  they  suppose  the 
evangelists  to  speak. 

Thent  ht.     But  if  the  several  texts  be  duly  examined,  right- 

lerpreled,  there  will  i 


t  appear 

t  from  this  place,  but  rather  that 
cUsu,  which  arc  ordinarily  produced  lo  evince  the  beginning 




of  tbe  SitblHtth  ftt  morning,  will  bring  in  strong  evidence  to  de- 
monatrale  ila  beginning  rather  on  ihe  evening  before. 

TTifgit  53.  For  this  dawning  toward  ihe  fii'st  day  of  the 
week  is  meant  of  iho  artihcifll  ila^,  or  the  light  of  (he  ^rst  day 
of  the  week,  as  the  word  dawning  implies,  and  the  evidence  of 
Iheir  fact  in  coming  to  iho  sepulchre  deraonstrales  aa  much  ;  for 
it  is  not  tlie  scope  of  the  evangelist  to  set  down  when  tbe  first 
day  of  Ihe  week  began,  hut  al  what  lime  of  the  first  day  of  the 
week  such  and  such  actions  fell  out:  any  thing  done  in  any  time 
of  the  day,  whether  at  six  or  nine,  or  two  of  the  clock,  may  be 
said  to  be  done  that  day ;  but  it  will  not  follow  that  they  are 
therefore  done  in  the  beginning  of  that  day.  I  meet  with  two 
exceptions  here. 

1.  Some  say  that  it  might  be  meant  of  the  artificial  day 
if  Ihe  words  had  run  thus,  vix.,  nt  the  ''  dawning  of  the  day," 
or  tbe  first  day  of  the  week  about  the  dawning  of  the  day  ;  but 
Ihe  dawning  toward  the  first  day,  this  phrase  (they  sny)  seems 
to  describe  the  beginning  of  such  a  day  as  stands  in  relation  to 
the  whole  week,  and  all  the  other  days  of  the  week,  which 
are  to  be  taken  for  natural  days.  But,  1.  There  is,  I  hope,  a 
first  artificial  day  of  the  week,  as  well  as  a  natural.  3.  This  arti- 
ficial day  doth  not  in  this  account  exclude  the  night  before  as 
part  of  the  first  day,  and  consequently  the  natural  day,  consist- 
ing of '  night  and  light  t  therefore  it  may  well  stand  in  relation 
to  the  other  days  of  the  week  which  were  natural ;  for  although 
the  cvaDgclist  seta  down  particularly  when  these  things  about  the 
resurrection  of  Christ  happened  to  be,  viz.,  at  the  dawning  toward 
the  first  day  of  the  week,  yet  we,  that  begin  the  Sabbath  at  even- 
ing, may  and  do  use  the  same  phrase,  and  yet  so  speak  of  the 
artificial  day  upon  which  some  event  begins,  as  not  to  exclude  the 
night  before  upon  which  the  natural  day  begins.  3.  Compare 
the  evangelists,  and  the  dawning,  in  Matthew,  toward  the  Snt  day, 
will  be  found  to  bo  all  one  with  this  phrase,  viz.,'  the  first  day 
about  or  at  Ihe  dawning  of  it :  for  that  which  Matthew  calls 
dawning  to  the  first  day,  Mark  calls  early  in  the  morning, 
the  first  day  of  the  week,  at  Ihe  rising  of  the  sun ;  and  Luke 
calls  upon  the  first  day  of  the  week  very  early  in  the  morning : 
whence  it  is  evident  that  Matthew's  dawning  to  the  first  day  is 
mil  one  with  about  the  rising  of  the  sun  upon  the  first  day :  so 
that  this  diifercnce  between  dawning  toward  tbe  first  day,  and 
the  dawning  upon  the  firsi  day,  seems  to  be  an  Etiglish  cabalism, 
Mid  a  mere  curiosity  exhaled  and  extracted  out  of  the 
rather  than  any  solid  truth  which  the  text  holds  forth,  or 
Spirit  of  God  aimed  at. 

rords;  I 

«■  the  I 



1,  A  seconii  exception  is,  tli<il  thougli  llie  words  dag  in  Scrip- 
)  be  taken  Tor  the  artJKcial  day,  yet  never  when  Ilio  first, 
second,  or  thinl  day,  etc.,  are  joined  togetbur:  and  tliey  point  us 
to  the  fir^t  of  Genesis,  where,  when  the  first  or  second  tlay  is 
meniiuncd,  ii  is  constantly  meant  of  n  natural  and  not  an  artifi- 
cial day.  But,  1,  Tliis  ia  a  great  mistake  i  for  the  day  of  the 
Levites'  travel  (which  was  not  in  the  night,  but  upon  the  artifi- 
cial day)  is  called  tbe  fourth  day,  (Judg.  xix.  5,)  and  the 
fifth  day.  (ver.  8.)  2.  This  artificial  day  may  be  called  the 
first  day.  as  that  it  may  involve  tbe  night  before,  (where  we  make 
the  Sabbath  to  begin,)  as  well  as  the  night  after,  on  which  they 
make  the  Sabbath  lo  end;  and  thus  Ilie  natural  day  may  be 
here  comprehended  also,  (which  they  plead  for;)  the  same  day 
which  artificially  begins  at  daylight  may  naturally  begin  the 
night  before. 

The*it  bi.  If  we  should  suppose  that  this  day  is  meant  of 
the  artificial  day,  yet  there  is  a  harder  knot  to  be  unloosed  in 
tbe  words  of  Matthew,  who  atHrms  that  this  daylight  or  day- 
dawn  was  the  end  of  the  Sabbath ;  whereby  it  seeras  that  the 
Sabbatb  began  at  tbe  dawning  of  the  day  before,  and  therefore 
it  ends  at  the  dawning  of  tlie  first  day  following ;  and  hence  they 
infer  tliat  the  daylight  of  this  first  day  can  not  belong  to  the 
night  of  llie  Jewish  Sabbath,  which  immediately  went  before. 
And  I  confess  the  argument  is  strong  and  undeniable,  as  the 
words  lie  under  the  gloss.  We  must  therefore  inquire  more  nar- 
Xttwly  into  the  true  translation  of  the  words,  and  their  meaning. 
7%ttu  5!<.  That,  therefore,  which  we  translate  tlic  end  of 
I  Sabbath,  is  in  tbe  original  Aifi  Si  onfifiurui'',  which  words 
B  rarioualy  translated ;  we  shall  only  observe  that  the  Greek 
1  i^i  halb  a  double  signification,  in  frequent  use   among 

1.  Somewbile  it  signifies  late  time,  or  the  extreme  and  last 
i  of  the  continuance  of  any  thing,  aa  /"I'i  if^i  tf^g^i  i.  e., 
lale  time,  or  latter  time  of  the  day. 
i.  Sometimes  it  signifies  a  long  lime  afler,  as  iv*  >4>  rpianr, 
Lea  long  time  after  the  Trojan  war.  Now,  in  this  place  it  is 
I  to  be  translated,  and  in  this  latter  sense,  thus,  "  a  long  time,"  or 
"  a  good  while  after  tbe  Sabbath  was  ended,  as  it  began  to  daHU  to 
the  first  day  of  the  week,"  etc  ;  which  interpretation,  if  it  be  mode 
good,  will  clear  up  this  ditBculty,  viz.,  that  the  Jewish  Sabbnili  did 
not  end  at  tbe  dawning  of  the  first  day  of  the  week,  but  long 
before  ;  nor,  indeed,  durst  I  incline  to  this  interpretation,  if  1  did 
not  see  the  evangelists  (tbe  best  interpreters  one  of  another) 
nuking  tb«  tome  to  my  hand. 



Hiesit  o6.  For  drst.  Murk,  who  writ  ufler  Matthew,  nad  is 
best  able  to  interpret  his  words,  expressly  saith  ihal  tlie  Snbbath 
was  pasL  when  the  women  ctuiie  lu  the  sepuleher ;  his  words 
are,  SiaytruiAirov  oufffitlfou,  the  Sabbalh  being  past.  (Mark  x\\.) 
1.  Hence,  thercrore,  if  Maiihew'a  words  should  be  translated, 
late  on  the  Sabbath,  or  U>wai-d  the  end  of  the  Sabbath,  then 
the  Sabbath  was  not  already  past,  (as  Mark  aflirms,)  but  draw- 
ing toward  an  end.  iklark,  therefure,  telling  us  that  the  Sab- 
bath was  ended,  and  yet  not  telling  us  when  it  ended,  wh3r 
should  we  not  harmonize  the  evangelists  by  Matthew's  words, 
whieli  tell  us  that  it  was  long  before  ?  2.  The  time  of  the  com- 
ing of  some  of  the  women  to  the  eepulchcr.  as  it  was  npon  lh« 
first  day  of  the  week,  so  it  was  some  lime  within  ihe  night ;  and 
hence  Mark  tells  us  it  was  very  early,  (Mark  xtL  2,)  which  can 
not  he  at  the  rising  of  the  sun  only  when  it  is  said  also  that  they 
came  to  tbeseptileher;  for  that  is  not  Uat  nqo»,  valde  niorte,  or 
very  early.  Again :  Luke  tells  us  that  it  was  toHqou  ^ddro;, 
Tery  early  or  in  the  depth  of  the  night ;  for  so  the  word  AfS^o; 
frequently  signifies  the  tirae  of  the  night  when  cocks  crow.  I 
forbear  to  instance  in  Greek  writera,  because  the  evangelist  John 
clears  up  this  most  fully,  who  expressly  saith  that  it  was  oaonios 
inl  tOo'ii,  it  being  yet  dark  ;  and  thou^  it  be  said  (Mark  xvi. 
2)  tliat  the  women  came  lo  the  sepulcher  about  the  rising  of  tha 
sun,  yet  Fiscator  and  others  interpret  that  of  their  last  actual 
coming  to  it ;  their  preparation  for  it  being  very  early,  while  it 
was  yet  dark  night ;  and  itseems  there  were  two  comings  by  sev- 
eral of  them  to  the  sepulcher ;  for  it  is  evident  that  Mary  (who 
had  most  aifection)  came  to  the  sepulcher  while  it  was  yet  dark, 
the  rest  of  them  possibly  preparing  tliereunlo.  However  the 
evangelists  be  reconciled,  this  is  evident,  that  the  first  stirring  of 
the  women  about  that  work  from  which  they  abstained  upon  the 
Sabbath  day  was  very  early  in  the  depth  of  the  morning  dark- 
ness, before  the  daylight,  when  some  would  begin  the  Christian 
Sabbath ;  and  from  hence  it  follows,  1.  That  if  the  Sabbath 
was  not  passed  even  before  this  dark  lime  of  the  night  began, 
but  rather  ended  when  the  first  day  of  the  week  began  to  dawn, 
then  it  will  follow  that  these  holy  women  did  not  rest  the  Sab- 
bath according  to  the  commandment ;  for  we  see  they  are  this 
nighl  busy  about  those  things  which  they  did  forbear  to  do  be- 
cause of  the  Sabhath.  [Luke  xx'm.  52.)  2.  Hence  it  will  also 
follow  that  if  the  Sabbath  was  not  ended  before  this  dark  time  of 
Ihe  night,  hut  only  at  the  dawning  of  the  daylight,  then  our 
Saviour  could  not  arise  from  tlie  dead  the  first  day  of  the  week, 
but  within  the  dark  ni^ht  of  the  Jewish  Sabhath  ;  for  Mary  came 
when  it  was  dark,  nnd  the   Lord   Christ  was  lisen  befora   sha 

233       .1 


and  liow  long  before  no  man  can  tdl ;  but  it  is  evident 
that  Christ  aro$e  the  lirst  dnj  of  the  Uf  t-k,  (Mark  xvi.  9.)  and 
tiierefore  the  Saiibnth  voi  ended  long  bi-lbre.  S.  If,  Iherefare, 
die  Sabbath  woa  past  al  the  dark  time  uf  the  night,  how,  then, 
«ra  the  Sabbatli  begin  al  morning  light?  and  if  it  was  passed 
vfaen  it  wax  thus  dark,  when,  tlien,  could  ihe  Sabbath  end,  but 
when  tbia  night  did  first  begin  ?  and  if  this  was  bo,  it  was  then' 
trulj'  ^v'  aHfKiiiiuir,  a  good  while  after  the  Sabbath  wau  ended 
when  this  dawning  toward  the  lirst  day  began,  according  to  Ihn 
interpretation  given. 

T^uit  57.  It  is  true,  indeed,  that  thi^  lime  of  darkness  is 
Cftlled  morning;  and  heni-c  some  would  infer  that  the  Subbath 
begins  in  the  morning  ;  but  suppose  it  be  so  entltid,  yet  it  is  not 
called  morning  light,  at  which  lime  they  plead  the  Sabbath  should 
begin :  and  it  is  improperly  called  morning,  because  (as  bath 
been  formerly  shown)  it  is  preparalively  so,  men  usually  prepar- 
ing them  for  the  work  of  the  daylight  following.  Morning  ia 
bUo  frequently  taken  in  Scripture  for  any  early  time,  (Epb.  iii. 
5,)  and  bo  this  night  of  the  first  day  of  the  week,  wherein  Ihe 
women  arose  to  their  work,  was  an  early  time,  and  therefore 
cnllt^d  morning.  Again,  suppose  a  double  morning  be  acknowl- 
edged, (as  there  was  a  double  evening,)  yet  it  will  not  follow  that 
this  morning  belongs  only  lo  the  day  folluwiug,  for  it  may  be- 
long to  the  night  before;  for,  as  where  there  are  two  evenings 
■pnkcn  of.  the  former  belongs  to  the  day,  the  latter  to  the  night, 
■0,  if  we  grant  two  mornings,  the  latter  morning  may  belong  to 
the  day  ensuing,  and  the  former  lu  the  night  preceding ;  if,  there- 
fore, any  plead  for  the  beginning  of  the  Subbaih  al  the  morn- 
ing light,  these  places  of  the  cvang'-list  will  not  bear  them  out  in 
it,  it  being  dark  morning  when  Christ  arose  ;  if  they  say  it  be- 
gins in  the  diirk  morning,  then  let  them  set  exactly  the  time  of 
that  dark  morning  wherein  Christ  arose,  and  when  they  would 
begin  it ;  but  no  wit  of  man,  I  fear,  is  able  to  demonstrate  this. 
*  7X?*u  ^8.  And  surely  it  is  of  deep  consideration  to  all  those 
who  would  have  the  beginning  of  the  Sabbath  to  be  just  at  the 
time  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  on  the  morning,  that  not  any 
Mie  of  the  evangelists  do  set  forth,  or  aim  to  set  forth,  the  exact 
time  of  Christ's  resurrection ;  they  tell  us,  indeed,  the  exact 
time  of  Ihe  women's  preparatioTi  and  coming  tu  the  scpulcher, 
cod  of  the  earthquake,  and  fear  of  the  soldiers,  and  that  these 
things  were  done  in  the  morning,  but  none  of  them  points  out 
the  time  of  Christ's  rising,  nor  is  it  their  seope  to  show  exactly 
when  he  rose,  but  only  to  show  that  lie  was  risen,  and  that  he  ap- 
peared to  many  being  risen,  who  came  to  seek  for  him.     Now, 





HHuredl^,  if  it  bad  been  the  mind  of  God  tliat  his  people  should 
begin  ibe  Siibbaih  when  Christ  bej^an  his  resurrection,  he  would 
have  pointed  ogC  the  exact  liroe  when  he  did  rise,  tliat  so  ibey 
night  exuctly  begin  the  Sabbnlh ;  bnt  none  of  the  evangelists 
point  out  the  time,  nor  is  it  tlieir  scope  exaHly  f o  to  do  ;  nay, 
fliey  do  eiaetly  point  out  when  other  malters  happened  about  the 
«omen'«  coming  to  the  sepulcher,  but  this  in  not  miide  mention 
of}  only  we  miiy  gather  by  laying  mony  things  logpiher  about' 
vbat  time  it  lihuulil  be,  and  therefore  I  marvel  at  them  who 
would  prove  the  beginning  of  the  Sabbath  at  the  time  of  Christ's 
resurrection  from  the  four  evangelists'  speaking  etactly  to  the 
time  of  the  women's  rising  in  ilie  morning  to  tisil  Christ's  sepul- 
cher, but  not  »  word  of  the  main  thing  this  drives  at,  which  ia 
the  exact  time  of  Christ's  rising. 

TSui't  bS.  Those  that  would  have  the  Sabbath  begin  at 
morning  allege  John  xx.  19,  where  it  is  said,  "that  the  same 
day  at  even,  which  was  ihe  first  day  of  the  week,  Jesus  came 
among  his  disciples,  when  the  doors  were  shut."  which  (say  they) 
was  within  night ;  and  theKlbre  the  night  following  belongs  to 
the  day  before,  which  was  the  Christian  Sabbath  ;  wbii^h  place 
compared,  with  Luke  xxiv.  33,  does  further  clear  up  (as  they 
BHj)  this  truth  ;  for  the  two  disciples  who  went  lu  Emmaus,  and 
met  Christ,  are  said  to  return  to  the  disciples  when  they  are 
Ibus  met  together ;  which  evening  can  not  (say  they)  be  po^ibly 
meant  of  the  Jirst  evening  before  sunlight  was  set,  because  the 
day  being  far  spent,  (vcr.  29,)  and  they  constrained  him  to  abide 
with  them,  (whi<.'h  argute  that  it  was  lair,)  and  tlie  distance  of 
£mmauB  from  JeruHalem  being  sixty  furlongs,  or  eight  miles 
excepting  a  half;  so  tliat  it  wna  impossible  for  them  to  travel 
BO  long  H  journey  in  so  short  a  lime,  within  the  compass  of  the 
first  evening :  heni:e  therefore  it  is  meant  of  the  second  evening, 
which  was  within  night,  which  yet  we  see  belongs  to  the  day 
before.  But  there  are  many  things  considi:rable  to  evacuate 
the  strength  of  these  reasons. 

Thetis  00.  For,  first,  this  invitation  our  Saviour  had  to  stay 
by  the  two  disciples  was  probably  to  some  repast,  some  time 
^ler  high  noon ;  possibly  to  a  late  dinner  ratliisr  than  a  late 
■upper  toward  the  latter  evening ;  and  if  so,  then  the  disciples 
might  easily  come  from  Emmaus  to  Jerusalem  before  sunset  with- 
in the  former  evening  ;  for  the  words  "  toward  evening,"  nt/ui  ta- 
tiii/ur,  may  be  as  well  understood  of  the  first  evening  toward 
two  or  thi-ee  of  the  elook,  as  of  ihe  second  ;  and  if  it  be  object- 
■d,  that  before  the  first  evening  the  day  could  not  be  said  to 
JH   iM   spent,    yet    if    the  words   ba   well   obsurviid,  i 


Dslation  can  be  forced  from  them,  for  ihe  words  are  xinmcr 

)  ftfii^a,  I.  It.,  "Ihe  (lay  hath  declined,"  which  is  truly  said  of 

any  time  aller  high  noon,  and  llierofore  mif^ht  be  a  fit  season 

to  press  our   Saviour   to   eat;    aa    may  appear  by  comparing 

Uiia  with  a  paralkl  scripture,  (Jud;;.  xtx.  8,  9.)  which  is  almost 

word  for  word  with  this  place  of  Luke :  for  the  Levile's  father 

invitea  him  to  cat  somulhing  at\er  his  early  rUiiig,  (ver.  8,) 

which  was  too    soon    for   suppor,  and    iberefore   stiema    to  be 

rather  to  n  dinner  which  they  tarried  for  until  aher  high  noon, 

or  OS  it  is  iu  the  original,  Divi  rrias'is,  i.  e.,  until  the  day  de- 

«lineil,   (just   as    it    is   here  in  Luke.)    and  then  when  dinner 

I  Was  ended  he  persuades  him  to  stay  still  because  the  day  was 

I  weak,  and  (as  we  translate  it)    toward  evetiin;;,  (as  here  the 

t^isciples  tell   our  Saviour ;)  and    yet   after    Ilieae    persuasions 

0  tarry,  as  late  as  it  wits,  he  departed  and  came  to  Jerusalem 

f 'kefbre  night,  and  from  (hence  lo  Gibeah  (without  any  miracle 

to)  before  sun  was  set,  or  the  latter  evening  ;  and  verily  if  we 

■ay  give  credit  lo  topographers,  Gibeah  was  almost  as  far  from 

r  Beihlem  (from  whence  the  Levite  came)  as  Jerusalem  was  from 

tEromauSi  and  therefore  if  the  Leviie  came  with  hi»  cumber  and 

'concubine  so  many  miles  liefore  the  second  evening,  notwiih- 

•tanding  all  the  arguments  used  from  the  day  declining,  and 

(hat  it  was  lowurd  evening,  why  may  we  not  imagine   the  like 

of  these  disciples  at  Emmaus  much  more?  who  had  no  cumber, 

and  whose  joy  could  not  but  add  wings  (oavery  swift  return  lo  the 

deven  before  the  second  evening,  notwithstanding  the  like  argu- 

s  here  used  in  Luke  xxiv.  29.     And  yet,  secondly,  suppose 

>t  they  invited  our  Saviour  lo  sapper;  yet,  the  former  evening 

igtnning  about  two  or  three  of  the  clock  in  ihe  afternoon,  our 

k'Saviour  might  stay  some  time  to  eat  wiih  them,  and  yet  they  be 

icly  enough  at  Jerusalem  before  the  second  evening ;  for  sup- 

it  Jerusalem  before  the  second  c 
r  Saviour  slaid  an  hour  with  tbeni,  or  more,  after  two  o 
i  of  the  clock ;  yet,  if  a  strong  man  may  walk  ordinarily 
rve  miles  an   hour,   why  inigbl   not   ttic  tidings  of  this  joyful 
i  make   ihem   double   their  pace,  whether  on  fool  or  hurse- 
:,  (no  mention  is  made  of  either,)  and  so  be  tliere  wiihin  an 
li  Imur  and  half,  or  thereabout,  before  the  second  evening  could 

TTietit  ei.  And,  although  our  Saviour  ap)>eared  lo  ihem 
when  i)i«  doors  were  shut,  yet  it  is  not  said  that  the  doors  were 
■htil  because  it  was  nighi,  bnl  for  fear  of  the  Jews  and  ifaeir 
punuivitnts;  that  they  might  not  rush  iu  suddenly  upon  them, 
which  tliey  might  do  in  the  day  as  well  as  in  the  night;  ami 
though  this  was  a  poor  tafepiard  from  their  enemiw,  yi(  it  wa* 



•ome,  aniJ  the  best  which  ihey  liad.  or  at  leost  could  think  of  at 
such  n  lime  ;  and  ir  our  Saviour  came  to  iLem  when  ihcy  were 
at  supper,  (Mark  xvi.  14,)  and  if  the  ordinary  time  of  the  Jtwn' 
■upper  was  a  iiitle  alter,  or  about  sunset,  (as  might  be  ilemon- 
■tnUcd^  then  the  second  evening  was  not  as  yet  lifgun  ;  no,  not 
when  Chrisl  came,  much  less  before  the  other  Xwo  came,  who 
"were  there  from  Emmaus  before. 

TTittit  62.  It  is  fuiJ,  by  some,  that  if  it  was  not  very  late, 
tlien  the  argumenU  of  the  disciples  to  persuade  Christ  to  Blay 
were  weak  ;  but  it  ^ecms  (say  (hey)  they  were  strong,  because 
it  is  said  "  they  constrained  him  ; "  but  we  know  that  much 
•Section  will  sometimes  urge  a  weak  argument  very  far,  for 
atay  of  some  special  friend  ;  and  when  arguments  will  not  pre- 
vail,  it  will  hold  them  and  constrain  them  by  force  ;  and  thus  it 
■eems  the  discifites  dealt  h'ith  our  Saviour ;  iheir  constraining 
him  was  not  bo  much  by  force  of  ailment  as  violence  and 
force  of  love,  for  so  the  woixls  in  the  original  (;iii^6'i<luic»io) 
properly  signifies  ;  and  hence  it  seems  thai  there  was  day  enough 
above  head  tp  travel  farther  in  ;  otherwise  what  need  such  vio- 
lent persuasions  to  stay  with  them  ?  and  for  any  to  say  that  the 
parallel  of  the  Levite's  father's  persuasions  to  slay,  upon  weak 
grounds,  is  not  the  same  with  this,  because  his  arguments  might  suit 
well  not  to  begin  a  long  journey  when  it  was  past  noou,  whiuh 
was  the  case  there  ;  but  it  is  a  reason  of  no  foi'ce  to  persuade  to 
go  farther  when  a  man  is  in  a  journey  already,  which  is  the  case 
here.  I  say  this  answer  is  against  the  praciice  of  love  in  coni> 
mon  experience  ;  men  weary  in  their  journey  may  stand  in  more 
need  of  persuasions  to  siay  than  they  that  have  not  begun  to 
travel  at  all ;  nor  was  the  Levite's  journey  long  from  Bethlem  to 

The^t  63.  Nor  is  it  an  argument  of  any  weight,  from  John 
xxxix.  1,  because  the  two  disciples  are  said  to  abide  with  Christ 
that  day,  that  therefore  the  night  following  did  belong  to  that 
day,  (they  staying,  as  it  is  supposed,  all  night,)  and  consequently 
that  the  day  begins  in  the  morning ;  for  these  disciples  coming 
to  Christ  at  the  tenth  hour,  or  four  of  the  clock  in  the  afternoon, 
there  were  then  two  hours  remaming  until  night,  (the  Jews'  ar- 
titlciul  day  continuing  from  six  to  six,)  within  which  time  our 
Saviour  (who  can  do  much  work  in  a  small  time)  might  suffi- 
ciently instruct  them  (for  that  lime)  wiihin  the  space  of  two 

Cientiy  instruct  tiiem  (tor  lliat  lime}  wiium  me  space  oi    two 

^^    hours  ;  and  why  might  they  not  depart  before  the  nigiit  came,  I 

^^L  ■nd   HO   stay  with  him  only  so  short  a  lime  ?     And  yet,   if  they  I 

^■tdid  stay  that  nighl,  they  might,  noiwilhslanding,  be  said  to  stay  I 

^B*that  artificial  day  only,  without  reference  to  any  night  before  or  M 

L    _      _   oi 



after,  or  lo  any  parP  of  [be  morning  foUuwing  llmt  niglil,  when 
it  is  probable  ihej'  departed,  if  tbey  did  slay  witb  him  all  that 

Thetit  64.  Tho»e  who  think  that  Paul  would  never  have 
prealihed  till  midnight,  (Acts  xx.  7.)  if  that  night  bod  not  been 
port  of  the  Sabbath  wbieh  began  the  morning  before,  mach  less 
would  he,  after  this  long  sermon,  hare  rommuniuued  with  (hem 
in  the  sacrament,  (ver.  II,)  anleaa  it  Lad  been  the  Sabbath  day, 
miiy  do  well  to  conaider  these  things :  — 

1.  That  tlie  cause  of  taking  in  no  much  of  the  night  following 
for  preaching  till  midnight  wa*  exlroordinary,  viz.,  Paul's  early 
departure  never  to  see  their  faucs  more,  and  lo  say  that  if  this 
night  was  no  part  of  the  Sabbath,  it  was  then  unreasonable  to 
hold  ibem  »o  long  at  it,  is  an  assertion  which  wants  reason,  if  we 
do  but  consider  the  shortness  of  his  time,  the  largeness  of  Paul's 
heart,  speuking  now  for  his  last,  and  the  sweetness  of  their  affec- 
tions OS  might  enaily  enable  them  to  cuntinue  till  midnight 
and  upward,  with  cheerfulness,  and  without  thinking  the  duty 
tedious  and  unreasonably  long.  Paul  therelbre  might  begin  bis 
Krmon  some  part  of  the  daylight,  which  was  part  of  the  Sabbath 
day,  and  continue  it  till  midnight  fallowing,  and  yet  ibis  night  he 
no  part  of  the  Cliristian  Sabbath,  because  it  was  an  extraordinaiy 
cause  which  pressed  him  hereunto. 

2.  That  there  is  nothing  in  the  words  which  will  evince  the 
Sabbath  to  continue  so  long  as  Paul's  sermon  did  ;  for  suppose 
those  who  begin  the  Sabbath  at  evening,  thnt  it  should  be  said 
of  such,  ihei  being  met  together  the  lirst  day  of  the  week  to 
break  bread,  ihcir  teacher,  l)eing  (o  depart  on  the  morrow, 
preached  unto  them,  and  continued  bis  speech  till  midnight ;  will 
this  argue  a  continuance  of  the  same  day  ?  No,  verily  ;  and  the 
like  reason  is  here. 

3.  That  the  Lord's  supper  might  be  and  was  administered  be- 
fore Paul's  sermon;  for  there  is  a  double  breaking  of  bread  in 
the  text:  the  one  is  of  common  bread,  (ver.  II,)  after  Paul  had 
prenched  ;  and  the  other  is  of  holy  bread  in  the  eucharist,  (ver. 
7 ;)  for  the  Syriac  calls  that  breaking  of  tlic  bread  wliich  is  men- 
tioned verse  7,  the  eucharist  or  Lord's  supper  ;  but  that  which 
ia  mentioned  verse  11,  common  brund;  and  the  Gr«ek  word 
jtaaafiMnti  implies  as  much,  and  hence  also  it  is  spoken  of  one 
man  principally,  viz.,  that  when  he  had  broken  bread,  and  eaten, 
and  Ulked  a  long  time  till  break  of  the  day,  be  then  deported,  it 
being  some  ordinary  repast  fur  Paul  after  his  long  preaching, 
and  before  his  long  journey,  and  is  not  therefore  any  sacrsLmonial 
eatinf!  the  manner  of  wliicb  is  wont  to  be  expressed  in  other 

words  than  as  they  ai-e  here  set  down ;  if,  therefore,  Pnol's  enting 
(Ter.  11)  WHS  common  brenil,  it  can  not  be  then  Afltrmed  Lhat  the 
euehwist  wns  then  adiuinisiered  afier  sermon  ut  midniglii,  and  yet 
they  pnrtalcing  of  the  siirirament  thid  diiy.  (ver.  7,)  it  seems  ihere- 
fore  that  it  was  adminii»Iered  soinv  time  before  this  cxlruordinary 
course  of  preaching  began. 

Tlitsit  6J.     Nor  will  it  follow  that  (he  Sabbath  begins  in  the 
morning,  because  the  morning  is  set  before  ihe  itighl,  in  tlie 

gLttlm,  for  the  Subbath,  (Vs.  xcii.  1,  2 ;)  tor,  1.  The  scope  of  the 
inlmtst  is  not  to  set  forth  when  the  Sabbath  begins,  but  how  it 
is  to  be  sanctified  ;  and  that  is  not  only  by  showing  forth  the  lov- 
ing kindness  of  God  every  morning  cm"  daytime,  (for  that  per- 
haps many  will  readily  do,)  but  also  in  the  nighi,  when  men  may 
think  it  loo  unseasonable  or  loo  luce,  and  therefore  in  a  holy  gra- 
dation from  the  less  to  the  greater,  he  first  makes  mention  of  the 
morning.  2.  The  Hebrew  word  for  every  night,  is,  in  Ihe  nights ; 
and  therefore  (suppose  that  this  psalm  is  specially  applicable  to 
the  Sahbath,  which  we  know  some  question)  yet  this  place  will 
as  soon  evince  llie  Sabbath  to  begin  in  the  night  Iwfore  the  morn- 
ing, and  to  be  continued  iti  sweet  affections  ibe  night  after,  as 
tbnt  it  should  begin  in  the  morning,  and  be  continued  the  night  af- 
ter 1  so  that  this  place  will  not  clear  this  cause,  nor  is  there 
any  weight  in  such   kind  of  reasonings. 

Tlifm  66.     Nor  will  it  follow  from  Levit  vii.  15,  with  22, 

29,  30,  and  Ex.  xii.  10,  that  because  the  fleHh  of  the  peace  offer- 
ings was  to  be  eaten  the  same  day,  and  nothing  to  be  left  until 
the_  morning,  (something  like  this  being  spoken  also  of  the 
pnssoTer,)  that  the  day  therefore  began  in  the  morning :  for  in 
Leviticus  there  is  a  double  commandment,  I.  To  eat  the  flesh  of 
their  peace  offerings  the  same  day ;  but  yet  because,  when  they 
have  eaten,  some  bones  and  offul  might  remain,  hence,  2,  They 
aru  commanded  to  leave  nothing  till  the  morning,  which  doth  not 
argue  that  they  had  liberty  to  eat  it  as  long  as  they  might  keep 
it,  but  that,  as  tliey  had  liberty  no  longer  than  the  same  day  to  eat 
it,  BO  nor  liberty  any  longer  than  the  next  morning  so  much  as  to 
keep  any  of  the  relies  of  it.  And  as  for  the  passover,  (a 
place  much  urged  by  some,)  they  were  to  kill  it  on  the  fourteenth 
day,  (Gx.  xii.  6,)  which  they  might  eat  the  night  following,  (ver. 
8,)  yet  so  as  to  leave  nothing  of  it  till  the  morning,  (ver.  10.) 
This  night  following  is  not,  therefore,  any  part  of  the  fourteenll^ 
but  of  the  fifteenth  day  :  for  at  midnight  there  was  a  cry,  (ver. 

30,  31,)  and  this  niglit  they  went  from  Rameses  to  Succoth,  (ver. 
37,  with  46,)  and  this  lime  is  expressly  called  the  morrow  after 
the  passover,  (Num.  xxuii.  3  ;]  nor  is  there  any  in< 

!4INr.    OK   THE   HAUIIATII. 

269        1 


rule  broken  to  kill  llie  piissover  upon  one  day,  and  rontinuo 
eating  of  it  M)me  part  of  anollier,  ihe  [lossover  being  a  feast  of 
more  dnys  llian  one. 

Thegii  67.  Nor  dolh  it  follow  that  because  our  Saviour  lelld 
Peter,  (Mark  icii-.  30;  Luke  sxii.  34.)  ibut  this  day,  even  ihia 
night,  (viz.,  of  ihe  pasMver,)  he  Bhould  deny  him,  that  this  night 
tiicrefore  was  any  part  of  the  precedent  day  ;  for  it  may  be  as 
fiiirly  interpreted  to  belong  to  the  day  following  thai  nigltl.  Nur 
b  it  necc8»ary  to  del«rmine  ibis  word  day  attvAys  to  a  determi- 
nate time  of  twenty-four  hours,  of  which  the  night  was  a  pan,  but 
only  of  a  special  aeason  of  time :  for  so  it  \i  frequently  ligunUively 
taken  without  any  rexpect  to  a  diiy  of  twenty-four  or  twelve 
hours,  viz.,  for  a  special  season  of  time  wherein  eome  special 
providence  of  God  doth  appear  and  is  put  into  execution,  aa  It. 
xsix.  la  and  xxv.  9,  and  xxvti.  1 ;  Ex.  xiv.  13 ;  1  Sam.  iv.  7, 8  ; 
X  Sam.  iv.  5,  7,  H. 

Thesit  G8.  It  answers  many  objection.^  produced  against  tho 
beginning  of  the  day  in  the  evening,  for  the  morning,  to  consider 
that  the  word  day  is  frequently  taken  in  Scripture  for  un  artlHcial 
day,  and  that  Ibe  word  morrote  frequently  signifies  a  new  artili- 
cial  day,  which,  in  respect  of,  and  reference  unto,  llie  artificial  day 
going  before  or  following  alVer.  is  no  part  thereof,  but  as  the  prov- 
erb is,  to-niorrow  is  a  new  day ;  and  thus  it  is  taken,  John  xii. 
IS;  vi.  32;  Act»  xxi.  7,  6 ;  1  Sam.  xiv.  H  ;  Acts  xxiii.  31, 
tSi  2  Sam.  xi.  12,  13;  Ex.  x.  4,  13;  DcuL  xxi.  22,  23; 
Josh.  viiL  29,  and  X.  26;  Ex.  vii.  4,11,12,  17,  with  i.  &-13i 
Sx.  xir.  ult.,  with  xxxiv.  2,  4,  2S;  Deut.  ii.  9.  11.  Whence 
•aly  let  ihia  be  noted,  that  to  ai^e  from  hence,  that  to-morrow 
morning  or  to-morrow  daylight  is  the  beginning  of  the  natural 
day,  because  it  is  called  a  new  or  another  day,  is  not  solid ;  nor 
also  tliat  although  the  night  following  the  artificial  day  be 
not  frequently  called  la-morrow,  yet  sometimes  it  is  so  called,  (1 
Sam.  XXX.  17,)  where  the  evening  of  their  morrow  stopped  Da- 
vid, i.  e.,  that  night. 

TKrm  60.  There  are  some  who  confess  that  the  Jewish  Sab- 
bath br-gan  at  the  evening  ever  since  the  rrvation  unto  the  time 
of  Christ's  resurrection ;  but  now  they  tell  us  that  it  begins  in 
the  morning,  because  of  Christ's  resurrection,  (the  cause  of  it,) 
which  began  then  ;  so  ihnt,  as  this  makes  the  change  of  the  day, 
■o  it  makes  a  change  of  the  beginning  of  tho  day  from  evening 
till  morning,  when  the  resurrection  of  Christ  began  ;  hut  the  foe- 
Uencas  of  this  opinion  will  apjteur  from  these  ensuing  cuniider- 

7%M)*  70.     1.   Contider.    Thitt  the  foundation  of  ibis  opimoD 


240  TUK  BisGiKxiNi;  OF  TriK  sAit&*Tn. 

ia  Bxceediiig  roKen,  viz..  Hint  the  day  must  not  begin  until 
thnt  work  whii-h  ot^caeions  the  chnnge  duih  actually  exist. 
But  we  know  that  the  passover  began  before  tlic  work  which 
did  occasion  it  ilid  actually  exist,  vie.,  the  angels  passing  over 
the  l9rBelii«siiimidnight,(Ex.  icit.29,  with  xii.  13, 14,and  vi.  8  ;) 
indeed,  the  Christian  Sabbath  day  is  not  before  the  day  o(  Christ's 
resurrection ;  yel  the  beginning  of  this  day  may  be  before  [be 
beginning  of  the  resurreclion,  as  it  was  in  the  passoTev. 

2.  Contider.  Thai  if  any  of  the  evangelists  hod  intended  a 
new  beginning  of  the  Sabbath  at  morning,  that  they  would  then 
have  set  down  the  exac;t  time  of  the  Lord's  resurrection ;  but 
none  of  them  do  this ;  they  set  down  the  time  of  olher  things  lo 
prove  tliAt  Christ  was  risen,  but  not  the  exact  time  of  the  resur- 
rection, for  it  is  wholly  uncertain  ;  certain  it  is  that  it  was  before 
daylight  began  ;  for  Mary  came  and  found  him  risen  while  it  was 
yet  dark,  (John  xx.  1,)  and  how  long  he  was  risen  before,  who 
can  determine  ? 

3.  Cuniider.  That  if  Christ's  resurrection  began  the  Sabbath, 
■0  that  in  that  moment  and  point  of  time  wherein  Christ  arose 
tLe  Christian  Sabbath  began,  iben  Christ  could  not  lie  three 
days  in  the  grave  j  for  either  he  lay  three  days  according  to  the 
Jewish  account,  beginning  the  day  at  evening,  and  then  the 
third  day  on  which  Christ  arose  (which  also  was  the  first  day) 
roust  begin  at  evening,  as  we  plead  for,  or  else  he  must  lie 
three  days  according  to  ihe  new  account,  which  begins  ihe  third 
day  in  the  morning,  leaving  out  the  night  before  as  not  apper- 
taining to  any  pait  of  the  week  before  or  after  i  but  according  lo 
Ihis  reckoning  it  is  impossible  that  Christ  should  he  three  days  in 
the  grave :  he  may  be  then  indeed  said  lo  arise  the  third  day, 
but  not  to  lie  any  part  of  the  third  day,  because  lying  in  the 
grave  implies  some  time  of  continuance  therein  upon  the  third 
day ;  but  how  could  this  be  when  they  say  that  the  moment  of 
Christ's  resurrection  began  the  day  of  uur  Christian  Sabbath  ? 

4.  Contider.  If  the  Jewish  Sabbath  was  the  last  day  of  the 
week,  and  began  and  ended  at  evening,  then  the  Christian  Sab- 
bath must  either  begin  at  evening,  when  the  Jewish  Sabbatll 
ended,  or  the  first  day  of  the  week  can  not  be  the  Christian  Sid>- 
baih,  but  only  a  part  of  the  first  day,  and  part  of  the  second  day  ; 
tor  the  night  which  goes  before  the  Christian  Sabbalh  either,  1,  they 
must  make  it  to  belong  to  the  Jewish  Sabbath,  and  then  that  Sab- 
bath must  be  sanctified  thirty-six  hours,  and  so  it  must  be  more  than 
>  day  which  is  sanclitied,  which  is  absurd ;  or,  2,  ibey  must  make 
it  belong  lo  the  CLrisiiun  Sabbath,  and  then  they  can  not  make  it 
begin  in  the  momhig;  or,  3,  they  must  leave  it  out  from  all 

^P«U1  I 

■    Ibere 

even,  and  iKol 
«CDnie  of  that  I 
y  of  the  week  ' 

weeklj'  account,  Hud  so  take  in  the  night  Tolloiving  (wliiyh  i 
of  the  secoml  day)  as  part  of  Ihe  Sabbalh. 

Coiuider,  That  llie  seventh  part  of  time  can  not  be  orderly 
1  lo  God,  but  it  mugc  be  either  the  first  or  last  seventh,  (ma 
been  shown;)  and  the  moralitj'  of  the  fourth  commandment 
rroui  not  be  observed  without  giving  to  God  either  of  these ;  if 
Iberefore  the  Jewish  Sabbatii  ended  at  even,  the  Cliristian  Sab- 
bath must  immediately  succeed  it,  and  begin  it  then,  or  eUe  a 
moral  mie  is  broken. 

6.  If  the  Jewbb  Sabbath  began  and  ended  at  c 
Christian  Sabbath  began  at  morning,  what  must  become  o 
night  which  is  between  them  both,  and  to  what  day  o 
must  it  belong?  If  any  xuy,  that  it  is  no  matter  whether  i 
long  to  any  or  no,  so  long  as  tipie  runs  on,  tbi«  answer  will  not 
suffice ;  for  though  time  runs  on,  yet  what  orderly  time  is  there 
bere  which  is  running  on  ?  Time  constsis  of  years,  and  ycare  of 
months,  and  months  of  weeks,  and  weeks  of  days ;  to  what  day  or 
what  week  then  must  this  night  belong  ?  They  that  maintain  this 
opinion  do  roundly  allirm  that  it  is  no  absurdity  to  leave  that 
one  night  out  from  weekly,  nor  ns  pertaining  to  any  week  before 
or  after,  but  say  it  was  lost.  Alas !  poor  forlorn  night,  that  art  ,' 
thug  strangely  Ibrsaken  ;  what  a  alnuige  kind  of  night  is  ibis 
which  belongs  to  no  day !  Wbut  a  misslmpen  lump  of  lime  art 
thou,  and  yet  how  canst  thou  be  part  of  time,  that  art  part  of  no  I 
day,  but  only  (as  they  say)  of  time  flowing  and  running  on,  with-  \ 

out  head  or  foot,  week  or  day !  ' 

Tltetii  71.     Tbey  tell  us,  that  "in  Joshua's  time,  when  tbe^i 

stood  still,  and  in  Hezekiab's  time,  when  Ibe  sun  went  back,  that 

there  was  as  great  a  perverting  of  the  order  of  time  as  this  cornea 

and  ibat  there  is  as  good  reason  to  alter  the  time  upon  such 

special  and  wonderful  occasion  as  Christ's  resurrection,  as  there 

to  disorder  the  course  of  time  then  ;"  but  the  weakness  of  this 

»er  may  appear  from  these  things :  — 

,  That  in  tbe  days  of  Joshua  and  llezekiah,  there  waa  no 
nonstroua,  misshapen  piece  of  time  cut  out,  as  here  is  imagined  ; 
4>r  though  the  sun  stood  still,  suppose  about  twelve  hours  in 
ihua's  time,  and  so  made  a  day  of  ihirly-six  hours,  yet  these 
hours  were  part  of  that  day,  and  of  that  which  ordinarily 
Uie  day,  viz.,  the  motion  of  the  sun  about  the  earth,  which 
ordinarily  once  in  twenty-four  hours,  only  the  Lord  stopped  it 
•  while,  and  so  made  it  a  longer  day,  and  yet  measured  by  ihu 
ordinary  measure  of  a  day,  viz.,  the  sun  comjiassing  the  earth ; 
which  this  night  is  noi. 
TOL.  m.  i\ 






3.  Though  novae  part  of  Ihu  weekly  lime  wa.-<  changed  in  some 
respect,  jet  no  ])art  of  saert'd  nod  Kubbaili  time  was  perrBrted 
by  either  the  euii's  standing  still,  or  -its  going  hack,  because, 
though  these  things  were  longer  than  ordinary,  jet  they  were 
bat  ordinarj  days  in  this  sense,  viz.,  because  there  was  no  more 
to  either  daj  than  that  whicli  ordinarilj  makes  a  day.  to  wit,  that 
space  of  time  wherein  the  sun  circularly  compa^seth  the  whole 
«arth.  For  though  a  seventh  part  of  time  be  morally  due  to  God, 
man  having  sis  days  for  himself,  jet  this  is  to  be  understood  as 
€ach  day  is  measured  by,  and  made  up  of,  the  whole  complete 
tnolion  of  the  sun  eircltng  the  earth  :  now,  though  these  djijs  were 
longer  than  usual  in  those  famous  times,  yet  ihey  were  onlj  sueh 
days  as  were  made  by  this  motion ;  and  hence  there  was  no 
change  or  perverting  of  the  time  of  the  Sabbath,  but  God  hath 
bis  due  then  orderly.  But  here  we  must  make  a  new  and 
strange  beginning  of  time,  by  leaving  out  a  whole  night,  and 
denying  God  a  seventh  day,  according  to  ordinary  account  and 
reekoning,  and  must  fall  to  a  disorderly  beginning,  upon  pretense 
of  a  more  than  ordinary  occasion  i  which  yet  we  see  was  not  so 
in  those  cxtraorditiarj  timcti  of  Hezckiah  and  Joshua. 

3.  In  the  days  of  Joshua  and  Hezeiiah  there  was  some  neces- 
sity of  prolonging  those  days,  and  that  in  a  course  of  providence, 
supposing  that  God  would  work  wonders  bj  his  providence  ;  but 
what  necessity  is  there  to  begin  the  daj  when  Christ  did  first 
arise  ?  for  this  action  falling  out  upon  the  first  day,  might  sanc- 
tify the  whole  day,  which  in  ordinary  course  should  have  begun 
Rt  evening;  wo  see  the  whole  fifth  of  November  is  sanctified, 
upon  an  occasion  which  happened  about  nine  or  ten  of  the  clock  ; 
and  the  evening  of  the  passover  was  sanctified  before  the  angel 
passed  over  the  Isi-neUtes  at  midnight,  which  was  the  occasion  of 
tlie  sanctiScation  of  that  day :  what  need  or  necessity  was  there 
to  leave  a  whole  night  out  of  weekly  account,  and  lose  such  a 
part  of  precious  treasure  ? 

4.  It  was  for  the  manifestation  of  the  marvelous  glory  of  God 
in  the  eyes  of  all  the  world,  good  and  bad,^  make  that  violation 
(as  it  were)  of  the  course  of  time  in  the  days  of  Joshua  and  Hez- 
ekiah ;  but  what  glory  doth  Christ  gain  in  the  eyes  of  others,  by 
making  the  day  to  begin  at  the  time  of  his  resurrection  by  the 
loss  of  the  whole  evening  before  out  of  the  account  of  weekly 
lime  ?  Or  what  glory  doth  Christ  lose  if  he  should  begin  the 
day  at  evening  when  the  Jewish  Sabbath  ended,  wlienas  the 
whole  day  thus  is  celebrated  and  sancti^ed  for  his  glory  in  re- 
spect of  his  resurrection  upon  this  day  ?     And  therefore  it  is  : 


imagine  as  mncli  reason  for  ihe  violalion  of  the 
of  lime  in  respucl  of  Ghriel's  resurrection  (which  makes  so 
little  for  the  glory  of  Christ)  as  there  was  tor  the  Tariation  of 
time  in  the  days  of  Joshua  and  Hezekiah,  which  made  so  ajipoT' 
ently,  and  evidently,  and  exceedingly  for  the  glory  of  God,  and 
Ibe  honor  of  (hose  who  were  types  of  Chvist, 

TAeii*  72.  To  say  that  ibere  b  a.  necessity  of  begiDoing  the 
Chrbtian  Sabbath  when  Christ  first  entered  into  bis  rest,  (the 
&st  moment  of  his  resurrection,)  because  the  Father  began  the 
Jewish  Sabbath  the  first  moment  of  bis  rest  after  his  six  days' 
labor,  is  not  solid  nor  sound ;  for  there  was  a  necessity  for  &>d 
the  Father  to  begin  his  rest  at  the  end  of  his  work ;  otherwise  a 
moral  rule  had  not  been  observed,  viz.,  that  a  seventh  part  of 
time  be  sanctified ;  for  six  days  being  finished  in  creating  the 
world,  there  was  now  a  necessity  of  sanctifying  the  seventh  day 
wherein  his  rest  began,  test  a  moral  rule  should  be  exempUrily 
broken ;  but  there  was  no  such  necessity  here ;  for  the  whole 
evening  of  the  first  day  may  be  aanctitied  upon  occasion  of 
Christ's  rest  on  some  piirt  of  that  day,  and  no  moral  rule  broken 
hereby ;  nay,  there  hod  been  a  moral  rule  broken  if  the  Chris- 
tian Sabbath  hud  not  begun  upon  this  evening ;  because  hereby 
God  should  have  lost  a  Sabbath  day  within  the  compass  of  s< 
days  as  (bey  are  measured  by  the  sun ;  and  this  is  directly  c 
to  the  morality  of  tlie  fourth  command ;  for  if  a  whole  ni^ht  bu 
loot,  (as  these  men  reckon,)  only  time  flows  on,  (they  say,)  liien 
it  must  be  full  seven  days  and  a  half  before  God  have  a  Sabbath 
to  begin ;  and  this  absurdity  in  the  course  of  time,  I  believe,  will 
BM  be  found  in  Joshua's  time,  nor  in  altering  the  begiiming  of 
the  year  in  Moses'  time,  (Ex.  xii.,)  for  no  moral  rule  was  ia- 
trenebed  upon  by  these  and  such  like  alterations. 

TAetit  73.  It  is  an  ungrounded  assertion  lo  say  that  the  ren- 
ts of  the  change  of  the  day  are  the  same  for  the  cliange  of  Ihe 
beginning  of  the  day ;  for,  1.  There  was  a  type  atGxed  (as  hath 
been  shown)  to  that  Jewish  Sabbath ;  but  I  never  yet  heard  of 
luiy  type  in  respect  of  the  beginning  of  ihe  Sabbath.  2.  Divine 
will  and  inslitution  changed  the  day,  and  that  according  to  a 
mond  rule,  vii.,  that  God  hath  one  day  in  seven  given  him ;  but 
God  could  not  begin  the  Sabbath  with  excluding  the  evening  be- 
fore Christ  arose  without  breach  of  this  rule,  as  hath  been  shown. 
The  day  might  be  kept  and  changed  without  breach  of  that  rule, 
but  the  beginning  could  not  be  changed  but  there  would  necessa- 
rily follow  some  breach  thereof. 

7%t$iM  74.     To  think  that  the  Sabbath  must  needs  begin  in 
the  morning,  because  we  read  not  expressly  after  Christ's  resuiv 


rection,  that  the  niglit  Bhould  belong  to  llie  ilaj  following,  nor  is 
there  any  instance  thereof  as  in  rhe  Old  Tegiament,  and  before 
Christ's  resurrection,  it  ma^  be  (thej  confees)  undeniably  so 
found,  —  I  say,  lo  think  the  Sabbath  must  begin  in  the  morning, 
upon  this  ground,  is  somewhat  like  u>  his  conceit,  who  findinv  in 
the  Old  Testament  that  ihe  seventh  day  is  to  be  sanctified,  but 
rol  finding  this  expresBion,  after  Christ's  resurrection,  hence  ho 
thought  there  was  now  no  seventh  day  to  be  sanctiBed.  Those 
who  can  answer  this  objection  may  kDow  how  to  answer  thereby 
their  own  argument  for  ihe  bcguming  of  it  at  momitig,  which  is 
just  like  unto  it;  if  indeed  there  were  clear  scriptures  for  the 
beginning  of  it  at  morning  in  the  New  Testament,  and  none  lo 
show  the  beginning  of  it  at  evening,  the  argument  had  much 
weight ;  but  this  hath  not  yet  appeared.  Old  Testament  evi- 
dences are  not  apocrypha  proofs  in  moral  matters  in  these  men's 
consciences  who  thus  argue  for  ilie  morniug. 

Tlieiit  75.  To  argue  the  beginnirig  of  the  Sabbath  at  morn- 
ing, from  ihe  congruity  and  fitness  of  the  season  for  holy  time 
rather  than  evening,  is  no  way  fair  or  rational ;  for,  1.  There 
may  be  aa  much  aaid  (perhaps  more)  for  the  fitness  and  congru- 
ity of  the  evening,  if  this  arguing  were  evicting  ;  but  we  know 
the  ground  of  all  superstition  hath  been  human  wisdom,  which 
puts  out  the  eagle's  eyes  when  it  goes  about  to  mend  them  ;  and 
when  it  would  better  God's  worship  by  goodly  seemiiigs  and  trap- 
pings, it  then  destroys  it,  at  least  corrupts  it ;  this  only  may  be 
said,  that  just  ns-we  lie  down  with  our  hearts  over  night,  so  we 
find  ihem  commonly  in  the  morning  ;  the  beginning  of  the  Sab- 
bath at  evening  will  force  us  in  conscience  lo  lie  down  over  night 
with  Sabbath  hearts,  which  marveloualy  prepares  for  the  receiv- 
ing of  Sabbath  blessings  the  day  ensuing. 

Thai*  76.  If,  therefore,  the  Sabbath  doih  not  begin,  neither 
according  to  the  custom  of  civil  nations,  nor  at  midnight,  nor 
morning,  what  time,  then,  must  it  begin  at  (from  any  color 
y  of  Scripture)  but  only  in  the  evening?  At  eveuing,  therefore, 
afYer  the  settmg  of  the  light  of  the  body  of  the  sun,  wherein  dark- 
ness begins  to  be  predominant  over  the  light,  the  Sabbath  begins 
now,  as  the  Jewish  Subballi  began  in  former  times ;  and  hero  let 
me  say  that  Old  Testament  proofs  may  be  in  this,  as  in  many. 
other  tilings.  New  Testamcat  rules. 

7Xe»i»  77.     If  the  Jewish  Sabbath  did  begin  and  end  at 
ing,  which  was   the  Inst  day  of  the  week,  then    the  Cli 
Sabbath  iho  first  day  of  the  week,  which  immediately  succeeds 
the  last,  is  to  begin  at  evening  also;  if  the  Sabbath  in  the  first 
institution    began    at  evening,  why    should   not    the   Christian 




Sabbath  be  conformed  m  near  as  may  be  lo  tlie  first  institution  ? 
But  we  see,  oul  of  Gt;a.  i^  that,  as  all  otiicr  days  began  at 
the  evening  or  dark  night,  so  it  was  not  orderly  or  possiblii,  ac- 
cording to  the  moral  rule  God  acted  by,  that  the  Sabbath  should 
begin  upon  any  other  time  than  the  evening ;  nor  is  it  improbftbia 
but  that  Ezeluel  foretells  this,  that  in  the  Chrislian  cliurch,  as 
the  g»Ie  for  the  Sabbath  should  not  be  shut  until  the  evening, 
(Ezek.  ilvi.  1,  2,)  80,  bj  just  proportion,  the  time  for  opening 
of  it  was  the  evening  before,  when  the  Subboth  began. 

TTifiit  78.     Now,  although  some  deny  the  beginning  of  the 
Sabbath  in  Gen.  i.  to  be  in  the  evening,  (deceiving  themselves 
and  their  readers  with  the  ambiguity  and  various  acceptation  of 
the  words  evening  and  morning,)  yet  this  is  moat  evident,  that 
the  lirst  day  begun  with  night,  or  darkness,  which  is  called  night, 
(Gen.  i.  i,  5,)  and  consequently  ended  with  daylight ;   let  even- 
ing and  morning,  therefore,  be  taken    how  they  will,  yet  it  is 
suflicient  to  prove  that  which  we  aim  al,  viz.,  that  as  the  first 
day  began  with  night,  and  ended  at  the  end  of  daylight,  so  by 
just  consequence  every  other  day  did,  even  the  Sabbath  itself, 
which  still  begins  the  beginning  of  night,  whii^  is  all  that  which 
we  mean  by  evening  when  we  say  that  it  begins  then ;  which 
also  the  Holy  Ghost  calls  darkness,  which  darkness  (Gen.  i.  2) 
J^^  calls  night,  (ver.  5,)  and  which  night  is  all  one  with  evening. 
J^     7%en(  79.     And  if  the  natural  (which  some  call  civil,  others 
pthe  compound)  day  began  fir«t  in  the  evening,  then  surely  it  oon- 
'''^naed  so;  or,  if  not,  then  this  disorderly  practice  should  have 
been  regnlated  again,  according  to  the  tin-l  pattern,  as  the  abuses 
cr«pt  into  the  Lord's  supper  were  by  Paul,  (1  Cor.  xi.  23,)  and 
as  errors  about  marriage  were  by  our  Saviour,  telling  them  that 

7S«if  80.     Nor  should  it  bo  a  wonder  why  the  wise  Creator 
should  begin  time^with  darkness,  or  the  less  noble  part  of  the  j 
day,  no  more  tlian  why^e  Lord  should   begin  the  world  w'  ' 
rude  and  confused  chaos  before  a  glorious  world ;  tlie  progreu 
of  his  wisdom  in  making  the  whole  world  being  for  the  most  pitrt  I 
from  more  imi>erfect  things  to  perfect,  from  the  chaos  to  beauty,  I 
from  the  servants  and  furniture  to  man,  the  lord  and  master  of  ' 
ibis  great  house ;  and  so  here,  from  darkness  to  light :  the  Sah- 
buih  also  being  a  day  of  rest,  was  it  not  most  proper  to  begin  it 
tlien,  when  man  begins  his  rest,  which  is  the  night  ?  when  also 
God  began  rest  from  his  work  in  the  first  creation. 

TfitMit  81.     Some  conceive  by  the  evidence  of  the  text  thai  ^  1 
darknoaa  was  before  light,  yet  wrestle  with  their  wits  to  make  it  \  \ 
21  • 

)f  the  y' 
*ith  a  ^ 

THK   BIC[>tN'>'IH<.i 

neither  part  of  the  night  nor  part  of  lime,  but  onlj  punelum  ttm- 
X^     jiorit,  and  by  this  shifl  would  make  the  first  day  to  begin  in  the 

■  Thesis  82.  Bat  was  ever  any  punetitm  lemportt  (which  is 
•J  thought  to  be  no  part  of  tirae)  called  by  the  name  of  night,  as 
this  darkness  is?  (Gen.  i.  4,  5,  with  ii.)  Was  ihe  world  made 
ill  six  days,  and  is  there  a  heaven  and  eurlh  made  within  the 
time  of  this  darkness,  aiid  yet  this  time  of  darkness  to  be  no  part 

I  of  lime,  but  only  a  mathematical  point,  but  no  real  part  of  suc- 
ceeding time.?  Zanchy  long  since  haih  largely  confuted  and 
ivushed  this  egg  shell,  where  the  reader  may  look ;  there  was 
not  indeed  any  celestial  motion  of  the  heavens  to  measare  this 
lime  by.  (for  Master  Weeraea  olijecte.  fempiu  rit  niertsura  mohu.) 
but  by  tbis  argument  there  was  no  time  till  the  fourth  day,  when 
the  sun  and  stars  were  created,  nor  is  time  properly  mentura  mo- 
J^  tug,  but  as  eternity  is  the  indeierroinale  duration  of  a  iking  to- 
gether, so  lime  is  the  determinate  duration  of  things  by  succes- 
sion 1  which  was  evidently  since  time  began  on  the  Hi's!  moment 
of  creation. 

Them  83.  Others,  who  acknowledge  this  first  darkness  to  be 
part  of  time,  yet  will  not  have  it  lo  be  part  of  the  nighttime, 
y  be(»use  light,  (the  habit,}  they  say,niust  go  before  darkness,  (the 
privation,)  liecause  also  liiis  first  darknesa  is  not  so  called  night, 
but  the  separated  darkness,  (Gen.  i.  S,)  when  God  separated  the 
light  into  one  hemisphere,  and  darkness  into  another. 

Thent  64.  But  this  arguing  is  almost  against  the  expreea  let- 
ter of  the  text,  (Gen.  i.,)  wherein  it  is  muai  evident  that  light 
was  created  alter  darkness  hod  been  some  lime  upon  ihe 
V  face  of  the  deep ;  which  darkness  can  not  be  part  of  the  day- 
light, no  more  than  blindness  is  a  pan  of  siglil,  and  therefore  is 
a  part  of  the  night,  before  this  conceived  separated  darkness 
could  cxisi.  Beside,  the  separation  of  darkness  fmm  light  doth 
not  make  any  new  darkness  which  is  a  new  denomiiialed  dark- 
ness, but  is  the  same  darkness  which  was  at  first,  only  the  sepa- 
ration is  a  new  placing  of  it,  but  it  gives  no  new  being  to  it. 
t  Tketig  85.  Suppose  also  that  light  and  darkness  ore  contra- 
rto  privanlia  ;  yet  it  is  not  true,  cither  in  philosophy  or  divinity, 
I  that  the  tiabit  must  always  actually  go  before  the  privation  in  die 
'  Mme  subject ;  for  the  privation  may  be  first  it'  it  be  in  tubjeeto  ca- 

£tei;  i.  e.,  in  a  subject  capable  of  Ihe  habit ;  for  silence  maybe 
fore  speech  in  a  man,  and  blindness  and  deafness  in  a.  man  who 
never  saw  nor  heard  a  word,  because  man  is  a  subject  capable 
,  of  both  }  and  so  here  durkneris  might  be  belbre  light,  because  this 
p.Mdi|j«ct  of  the  lirst  matter  was  capable  of  bottv 


^H  Thau  86.  Kor  U  it  true  in  divinity  that  the  darknegs  and 
^^■l^ht  were  at  flrst  separated  into  two  hemispheres ;  or  if  they 
^^B  were,  yet  what  orthodox  writer  aDinns  that  the  supposed  gepa- 
^K-nted  darkness  only  is  called  night  ? 

^^M      TVm  K7.     For  look,  as    the  darkne«!i   did  OTerspread   the 
^P  whole  cbaoe  and  all  the  dimensions  of  il  at  llie  same  lime,  why 
night  not  the  light,  the  habit,  be  extended  ae  far  aa  was  the  pri- 
vation before,  and  iliiit  at  the  same  time?  there  being  no  globe, 
or  denoe  body  of  earth  and  water,  (existing  ud  now  ihey  do,)  at 
that  time  created,  and  consei^uently  no  opaijue  and  solid  body  to 
divide  between  light  and  darkness,  and  go  to  separate  them  into 
two  hemispheres,  as  by  this  means  it  is  at  this  day,  unless  we  im- 
agine miracles  without  necessity,  and  thai  God  then  miraculously 
did  it  when  there  was  no  necessity  of  it.     For  the  element  of 
fire  being  figuratively  called  light,  it  being  (as  Junius  shows) 
proprietai  etteHiialii  iffiiii,  being  also  created  in  the  superior 
pert  of  the  vast  chaos,  might  therefore  be  cast  down  by  a  mighty 
hand  of  God  (there  being  no  ordinary  means  of  sun  or  stars  yet 
craalcd  to  do  il)  into  all  the  inferior  chaos,  and  so  make  day. 
JLnd  tlie  ascending  of  this  light  upward  again  might  make  it  to  be 
night ;  and  therefore,  although  God  separated  between  light  and     . 
I  4ukness,  yet  this  sepiiration  seems  to  be  rather  in  respect  of  time )( 
^'Aan  in  respect  of  place,  or  two  hemispheres ;  for  the  light,  when 
■^  WHS  cast  down,  sepamled  and  scattered  the  darkness,  and  so  j 
eluded  it,  so  that  when  there  was  light,  there  was  no  dai-kness ;  I 
1  darkness,  there  was  no  ligiht;  and  thus  they  succeeding 
excluding  one  another,  the  Lord  is  said  to  separate  them  one 
rftou  anuthtr.  but  not  into  two  imagined  hemispheres,  by  which 
r  tauginaiion  of  two  hemispheres  it  will  be  also  very  difficult  lo  set  / 
down  when  it  was  day  and  when  it  was  night,  at  this  time  of  theX 
cmuion ;  because,  in  respect  of  one  part  of  the  chaos,  it  might 
be  called  day,  in  respect  of  the  other  hemisphere  of  the  chaos  it 
miglil  be  called  night;  and  therefore  it  seems  more  suitable  to 
the  truth  that  the  descending  of  the  light  mode  day  throughout  tlie   j 
whole  chaos  remaining,  and  the  ascending  of  it  to  its  proper  place  / 
•uccessively  made  night ;  which  as  it  answers  many  curious  ques-  / 
lions  about  the  nature  and  motion  of  this  light,  so  it  yields  a 
more  than  probable  argument,  that,  if  the  daylight  continued 
twelve  hours,  (which  none  tjueslion,)  why  should  not  each  night 
continue  as  long?    and   therefore   that   the  lirst  darkness  did 
continue  »uch  a  time  before  the  creation  of  the  light. 

7%Mi'i  88.  But  suppose  this  local  separation  into  two  hemi- 
spheres was  granted,  yet  it  will  not  follow'frora  hence  that  this 
MpMntod  durkoM*  only  ia  oMwA  night,  and  ibai  lb*  darkowu 



i    OV   Tills  a.VBBATlI. 


before  waa  no  part  of  it ;  for  if  the  day  and  night  began  at  the 
imagiBeJ  division  of  light  and  (Urknesa,  ihcn  (this  division  being 
in  an  insloot  of  time)  neither  could  the  duy  be  before  the  night, 
nor  the  tligltt  before  ilie  dny.  but  both  exist  and  begin  logetlicr; 
and  then  it  will  follow  that  the  Iwginning  of  the  first  day  was 
neither  in  the  morning  nor  evening,  in  darkness  nor  light,  in 
night  nor  day ;  but  tliat  it  began  in  the  morning  and  evening, 
daylight  and  dark  night,  together ;  which  is  too  gross  for  any 
wise  man  to  afltrni,  nor  would  the  God  of  order  do  it.  Agitin  : 
if  the  first  darkness,  which  was  preexislent  to  this  hemispherical 
light  and  darkness,  wae  no  part  of  the  niglil,  then  much  less  wdb 
it  any  part  of  the  first  daylight,  and  so  no  part  of  the  natural 
day ;  which  if  any  should  alGrm,  they  must  deny  the  creation  of 
tlie  world  in  six  day^ ;  for  it  is  evident  that  the  heavens  and 
earth  were  made  in  the  time  of  the  first  darkness. 

Thetit  89.  To  say  tliat  this  first  darkness  was  part  of  the 
morning,  and  did  belong  to  the  morning  light,  as  now  some  time  of 
darkness  in  the  morning  is  called  morning,  and  therefore  is  called 
the  womb  of  the  morning,  (Ps.  ex.  i.)  is  a  mere  shift  to  prove 
the  beginning  of  time  to  be  in  the  morning,  and  an  evasion  from 
the  evidence  of  truth.  For,  1.  This  first  darkness  must  either 
be  the  whole  night,  consisting,  as  the  light  did,  of  about  twelve 
hours,  and  then  it  can  not  possibly  be  called  morning,  or  belong 
thereunto  ;  or  it  must  be  part  of  the  night,  and  that  which  came 
after  the  light  another  part  of  it,  and  then  we  may  see  a  monstrous 
day,  which  hath  part  of  its  night  before  it,  and  part  aller  it ;  be- 
side,  it  ia  contrary  to  the  text,  which  makes  the  whole  morning 
togetlier,  and  the  whole  evening  together,  the  whole  daylight 
jogether,  and  so  the  whole  night  together.  2.  That  darkness 
which  by  an  improper  speech  wu  make  to  belong  to  the  morning, 
in  oiu'  ordinary  account,  is  the  latter  part  of  the  night,  or  of  the 
darkness ;  but  we  read  not  in  all  the  Scripture,  nor  is  It  suitable 
to  any  solid  reason,  to  make  the  first  beginning  uf  night  or  dark- 
ness as  [lart  of  the  morning.  Now,  this  firat  darkness  (wbieli  is 
the  beginning  of  darkness)  is  called  night,  at  least  is  the  be^n- 
ning  of  night,  and  therefore  can  not  be  called  morning,  but  even* 
ing  rather,  as  we  usually  cidl  the  first  beginning  of  darkness 
after  daylight. 

T&etis  'M.  That  express  commandment  {Lev,  xxiii.  32) 
to  celebrate  the  ceremonial  Sabbath  from  even  to  even,  doth 
strongly  prove  the  beginning  of  the  moral  Sabbath  at  the  some 
time  ;  for  why  else  is  it  called  a  Sabbath  of  resl^  but  because  it 
be  spent  in  duties  of  humiliation,  as  the  other  Sabbath  in  ' 
I  suitable  to  the  nature  of  it?  and  hence  the  Lord's  care  is 

!N1NG    OF   THE 


^■nallj  esact  herein,  1.  Tbat  no  servile  work  be  done,  because 
^H  h  a  Subbatli,  (ver.  31,  32;)  2.  Tbat  it  be  spent  and  saiicti- 
^^Sed  from  even  to  even,  (meaning,)  like  as  you  do  your  weekly 
Sftbbailis.  And  bonce  the  Lord  eaith  not,  Vou  sball  celebrate 
your  d*y  of  atonement  front  even  to  even,  but  (the  Lord  usually 
nrappino:  up  argument  in  bis  words)  your  Sa&balh  ;  as  if  he 
should  iay.  You  would  account  it  a  profane  lliiog  not  to  celebrate 
your  ordinarj  weekly  Subbath  from  even  to  even,  or  to  do  any 
servile  work  on  iliat  day  ;  tbia  day  Is  a  Sabbalb,  and  tlierefora 
you  must  sanctify  it  from  even  to  even,  and  therefore  do  no'  ser- 
vile work  herein. 

TTiftii  91,  To  imagine  (as  some  do)  that  "  the  ordinary  Sab- 
Iwib  began  at  another  time,  because  here  God  makes  a  new 
command,  that  it  be  from  even  to  even,  in  oppositiou  to  the  other 
Sabbaths  beginning,  and  that  otherwise  it  had  been  enough  to 
eay,  Vou  shall  celebrate  this  day  as  a  Sabbath ; "  one  may  Irom 
the  same  ground  imagine  ilmt  in  other  Sabbaths  they  might  do 
any  servile  work,  because  here  also  they  are  forbidden  it ;  for  it 
may  be  as  well  siud,  that  otherwise  it  hud  been  enough  to  say, 
You  shall  sanctify  this  day  as  you  do  other  Sabbaths :  here, 
iherefore.  is  no  new  institution  of  time  from  the  begitming  of  the 
Sabbath,  but  of  »  new  ordinance,  together  with  the  application 
of  time  according  to  common  and  ordinary  account ;  and  the 
Lord  expresseib  from  even  to  even,  (wbicli  makes  up  a  natui^ 
d»y,)  lest  man's  heart  (which  is  soon  weary  of  duties  of  humilia- 
tion) should  intepret  it  of  an  artificial  (^y,  to  prevent  which 
mi«take  the  Lord  had  good  reason  to  set  the  distinct  bounds  of  it 
from  even  to  even. 

?%MM  92.  Jtor  can  this  evening  be  fairly  interpreted  of  the 
former  even  before  sunset,  as  taking  in  Uiat  also :  for  this  even* 
ing  is  to  begin  at  the  evening  of  the  ninth  day,  (ver.  S2,)  which 
evening  of  the  ninth  day  is  not  the  evening  of  that  day  aboat 
two  or  three  of  the  clock,  —  for  the  tenth  day  only  is  called  the 
day  of  atonement,  (ver.  27,)  and  therefore  part  of  the  ninth  day 
is  tio  part  of  the  atonement  dny,  —  but,  as  Junius  well  expounds 
it,  at  the  evening  of  the  ninth  day,  pula  ijua  nonat  dtei  tUjuiit,  at 
that  nick  of  lime,  which  is  the  contmurtit  terminal  of  the  end  of 
the  ninth  day  and  beginning  of  the  tenth,  you  shall  then  cele- 
brate your  SiU>bath ;  which  curious  exactness  of  the  Lord  is 
partly  to  express  his  zeal  for  the  full  and  plenary  observation 
of  the  day,  that  he  may  not  lose  a  moment's  time  of  honor,  as 
also  to  show  what  care  iliey  should  have  of  holding  out  from  tlio 
Arst  iKiiiit  to  the  last  period  of  that  Sabbath. 

7awi«  93.     And  therefore  it  is  a  groundless  deduction  from 


the  text  to  make  thia  day  to  be  of  extiTiordiniu-y  Itnglli,  and  bo 
an  unfit  measure  for  our  ordinary  Subbarh.  And  to  euy  tbat 
there  was  a  ceremony  in  beginning  ihis  day  ut  cvrn  is  hut  ffriUit 
dt'elwn,  and  can  never  be  made  good,  unless  ii  be  by  gucU  t'elcbes 
of  wit  whicrh  can  mold  ihu  pLiinest  history  into  iha  unage  of  ft 
goodly  allegory,  a  most  impudent  (."oursc  <i(  ur;;uin};,  in  Austin's 
judgment  and  in  bis  lime. 

79iesii  94.  If  the  Sabbath  do  not  begin  itt  evening,  why  did 
Kehemioh  (an  exemplary  magistrate)  command  the  gates  to  be 
shut,  when  the  gales  of  Jerusalem  began  lo  he  dark  before  the 
Sabbath?  (Neh.  xiii.  19.)  Was  it  not  lust  the  Sabbath  should 
be  profaned  [liat  night  by  bringmg  in  of  wares  nnd  burdens 
through  the  gates,  us  nell  ab  in  the  ensuing  dity  ?  Is  it  not  ex- 
pressly said  that  he  set  his  servants  fit  these  gates  that  there 
might  be  no  burden  brought  ia  upon  the  Sabbath  dny?  Is  it  not 
expressly  said  that  he  set  the  Levites  to  keep  the  gates  to  sanc- 
tify the  Sabbath  day?  (ver.  19,  22.)  Now,  if  ibis  evening  was 
no  part  of  the  Sahbalh,  how  could  tbey  then  ho  said  to  saucttfy 
the  Sabbath  thereby  'f 

Tlietii  95.  To  imagine  that  Nchemiah  did  this  to  prevent 
the  profaning  of  the  Sabbath  day  after,  ia  as  if  a  man  should 
shut  his  doors  at  noon  against  such  thieves  as  he  knows  will  not 
come  to  hurt  him  until  midnight  be  past.  It  would  be  weakness 
in  a  magistrate  to  Lake  away  any  considerable  part  of  the  week 
which  God  allows  for  labor,  to  prevent  [hut  evU  on  [he  Sabbaih 
which  he  knows  he  ie  suliiciently  able  to  prevent  at  the  approach 
of  ihe  day  itself;  for  Nehemiah  might  easily  have  shut  the  galea 
in  the  morning,  if  the  Sabbath  had  not  begun  before ;  and  might 
have  better  done  it  than  to  cut  so  large  a  thong  out  of  the  week 
time  lo  prevent  sueh  dehlement  of  the  Sabba[h  day. 

Hittit  9G.  When  therefore  the  gates  of  Jerusalem  began  to 
be  dark,  or,  as  Junius  renders  the  words,  qtium  abtimbrartntia- 
porta,  i.  e.,  when  they  were  shadowed  by  the  descent  of  the  sun 
behind  the  mountains  which  compassed  Jerusalem,  and  so  did 
cast  a  shadow  of  darkness  upou  the  gates  of  the  city,  Komcwhut 
sooner  than  in  other  places  le.'^  mountainous,  this  shadow,  being 
no  part  of  the  dark  night,  is  truly  said  10  be  before,  or  (as  the 
Hebrew  is)  before  the  face  or  looking  out  of  the  Sabbath  i  for 
although  the  Sabbaih  be  said  to  begin  at  sunset,  yet  it  is  to  be 
understood  not  of  the  setting  of  the  body  of  the  sun  visibly, 
but  of  the  light  of  the  sun  when  darkness  begins  to  be  predotn- 
ir  the  light,  and  men  are  forced  lo  forsake  their  work : 
now,  just  before  iliis  Nehemiah  shut  the  gales,  at  the  common 
term  and  end  of  the  six  days'  labor,  and  the  seventh  day'i 

I  THE    BEU]^NI^ti    Of    T 

»esl :  and  ihererore  it  is  a  weak  objeclion  which  some  mak«,  to 
My  that  this  evening  vas  noi  part  of  the  Sabliath,  because  the 
•gues  are  said  to  be  shut  before  the  Sabbath. 
TTtesii  97.  It  is  said  the  women  who  prepared  spices  for 
bur  Saviour's  bodj,  that  the;  rested  the  Sablmth,  which  is  evi- 
^n(  to  b«  in  th«  evening ;  and  this  they  did  not  superstitiousljr, 
Cu  some  say,)  but  according  [o  the  commandment.  (Lnlce  xxiiL 
63-56.)  If,  Uierefbre,  these  women  began  to  rest,  ai.'cording  to 
tiie  commandment  of  God,  upon  the  evening,  then  the  evening, 
lly  the  same  commandment,  is  the  beginning  of  the  holy  rest  of 
the  Sabbath.  It  is  not  only  the  commandment  of  God  that  one 
day  in  seven  be  sanctilied,  but  also  that  it  be  siinctilied  from  even 

I  the  evening,  ia 

T/ittit  08.     Now  that  they  began  t< 

»  evident  from  lliese  considemlions  ;  — 
1.  That  our  Saviour  died  the  ninth  hour,  (Luke  xxiii.  44,  46,) 
vhich  was  about  three  of  the  clock  in  the  afternoon.  A  little 
after  this,  Joseph  begs  his  body,  and  takes  it  down,  because  it  was 
w^aaSSaiof,  or  preparation  for  the  Sabhalb,  (Mark  v.  42,)  in 
which  prejiaralion  il  is  said  that  the  Sabbath  did  entifuoni,  an.w 
on,  shine  forth,  (Luke  xxiii.  34:)  now,  this  shining  or  breaking 
jarlh  of  the  SMbbalh  can  not  be  meant  of  the  daylight  morning 
■hilling  forth  ;  for  it  is  a  mere  dream  to  think  tliat  Joseph  should 
be  so  long  a  time  in  doing  so  little  work,  from  Saturday  in  the 
nflrimDon  until  the  next  morning  hght  only  in  taking  of  Christ 
from  the  cross,  wrapping  him  in  linen,  and  laying  him  in  his  own 
■epulcher,  which  was  not  far  off,  but  near  at  hand  also.  (John 
xix.  ii.)  The  shining  forth  of  the  Sabbath  also  stopped  the 
women  from  proceeding  to  anoint  Christ's  body,  after  they  had 
brought  their  spiced ;  and  therefore,  if  the  shining  forth  of  the  Sab- 
bath bad  been  the  morning  after,  they  might  certainly  have  had 
•ufflcient  lime  todoihat  work  in  ;  the  shining  fortli  therefore  of  the 
Sftbbath  was  in  the  latter  evening  in  which  the  Sabbath  began  ; 
•nd  it  ia  said  to  shine  forth  by  a  metaphor,  because  it  did  then 
flmt  ^^lear,  or  draw  on  ;  or,  as  Piscnlor  and  sundry  others  think,' 
becwwe  about  that  time  the  stars  in  heaven,  and  the  lamps  and 
nndlec  in  houses,  began  to  shine  forth ;  which  if  just  then  when 

IdnrkneM  is  predominant,  whiuh  ia  the  beginning  of  the  Sabbalb 
at  evening  lime. 
i.  If  that  evening  had  not  begun  the  Sabbath,  why  did  not  ths 
women  (who  wanted  neither  conscience,  nor  affection,  nor  oppor- 
tunity) anoint  his  body  that  evening,  but  defer  il  until  the  night 
■ft«r  ?  What  could  stop  tliem  bcri-in,  but  only  tlie  conscicDCe 
«r  the  commandment  which  bvgan  the  Sabbath  Ihut  evening? 





3.  Either  the  Sabbath  must  begin  thie  evening,  or  they  did  not 
rest  the  Sabbath  according  to  the  coaimandment ;  for  if  ibey 
began  to  keep  the  Sabbath  at  morning  Uglit,  ihen,  if  they  rested 
according  to  the  command  men  I,  Uiey  must  keep  it  until  the  morn- 
ing light  after ;  but  it  ia  manifest  that  Ihey  were  stirring,  and  in 
preparing  their  ointments  long  before  that,  even  in  the  dark  nigbt 
before  the  light  did  appear,  as  haih  been  formerly  sho^vn. 

Thetii  89.  Why  the  women  did  not  go  ^out  to  embalm 
Christ's  body  the  beginning  of  the  dnrk  CTcning  after  the  Sab- 
bath was  past,  but  staid  so  long  a  time  after  till  the  dark  morn- 
ing, can  not  be  eertainly  determined :  perhaps  they  thought  it  not 
suitable  to  a  rule  of  Grod  and  prudence  to  take  some  rest  and  sleep 
first,  before  they  went  about  the  ssuA  work,  and  might  think  the 
morning  more  tit  for  it  than  the  dark  evening  before,  when  their 
sorrowful  hearts  and  spent  spirits  might  need  mercy  lo  be  shown 
them,  by  taking  their  rest  a  while  first.  They  might  also  possi- 
bly think  it  offensive  to  others  presently  to  rim  lo  the  embalm- 
ing of  the  dead,  aa  soon  as  ever  the  Sabbath  was  ended,  and 
therefore  staid  till  the  dark  moruitig,  when  usually  every  one 
was  preparing  and  stirring  toward  their  weekly  work. 

Thtti*  100.  The  Lord  Christ  could  not  \\»  three  days  in  the 
grave,  if  the  Sabbath  did  not  begin  at  evening;  and  for  any  to 
athrm  that  the  dark  morning  wherein  he  arose  was  part  of  this 
first  day,  and  did  belong  thereunto,  is  not  only  to  overthrow  their 
own  principles,  who  begin  (he  Sabbath  at  the  beginning  of  day- 
light morning,  but  they  also  make  the  beginning  of  the  Sabbath 
It)  be  wholly  uncertain ;  for  who  can  tell  at  what  time  of  this 
dark  morning  our  Saviour  arose? 

Thttii  101.  It  is  true  there  are  some  parts  of  the  habitable 
world,  in  Kussia,  and  those  northern  countries,  wherein  for  about 
a  month's  time  the  sun  is  never  out  of  sight :  now,  although  they 
have  no  dark  evening  at  this  time,  yet  doubtless  they  know  how 
to  measure  their  natural  days  by  the  motion  of  the  sun  ;  if,  there- 
fore, they  observe  that  time  which  is  equivalent  to  our  dark  even- 
ings, and  sanctify  to  God  the  space  of  a  day,  ns  it  is  measured 
by  the  circling  sun  round  about  them,  they  may  then  be  said  to 
sanctify  the  Sabbath  from  even  to  even,  if  they  do  that  which  is 
equivalent  thereunto ;  they  that  know  the  east,  west,  south, 
north  points,  do  certainly  know  when  that  which  is  equiv- 
alent lo  evening  begins,  which  if  they  could  not  do.  yet  doubtless 
God  would  accept  their  will  for  the  deed  in  such  a  case. 

Jlient  102.  If,  therefore,  the  Sabbath  began  at  evening  from 
Adam's  time  in  innocency  till  Nehemiah's  time,  and  from  Nehe- 
miah's  time  till  Christ's  lime,  why  should  any  Ihink  but  that 



where  the  Jewish  Sabbath,  the  Uist  day  of  the  week,  doth  end, 
there  the  Christian  Sabbath,  the  first  day  of  the  week,  begins  ? 
Unless  any  can  imagine  some  type  in  the  beginning  of  the  Sab- 
bath at  evening ;  which  must  change  the  beginning  of  the  day, 
as  the  type  affixed  did  change  the  day ;  or  can  give  demonstra- 
tive reasons  that  the  time  of  Christ's  resurrection  must  of  neces* 
sity  be^n  the  Christian  Sabbath,  which  for  aught  I  see  can  not 
be  done.  And  therefore  it  is  a  groundless  assertion  that  **  the 
reasons  of  the  change  of  the  day  are  the  same  for  the  change  of 
the  beginning  of  it ;  and  that  the  chief  of  the  reasons  for  the  even- 
ing may  be  as  well  applied  against  the  change  of  the  day  itself, 
as  of  the  time  of  it  jBut  sufficient  hath  been  said  of  this.  I 
shall,  only  add  this,  that  there  is  no  truth  of  Christ's,  but,  upon 
narrow  search  into  it,  hath  some  secret  knots  and  difficulties,  and 
so  hath  this  about  the  beginning  of  the  Sabbath ;  it  is  there&re 
humility  and  self-denial  to  follow  our  clearest  light  in  the  simpli- 
city of  our  hearts,  and'  to  wait  upon  the  throne  of  grace  with 
many  tears  for  more  clear  discoveries  until  all  knots  be  unloosed. 
YOL.  ui.  22 



K         aUChr 
■  Tket 

Thfiit  1.  The  won!  Sahbnth  properly  signifies,  not  commoir, 
but  mcTtd  or  holy  rest.  The  Lord  tlierefore  enjoins  this  rest 
from  labor  upon  ihis  day,  uot  so  mucli  for  ihe  rest's  sake,  but 
because  it  is  a  medium,  or  means  of  that  holiness  which  the  Lord 
requires  upon  tlijs  day ;  otherwise  the  Sabbath  is  a  day  of  idle* 
neB3,  not  of  holiness ;  our  cattle  can  rest  but  a  common  real  from 
labor  as  well  as  we  ;  and  therefore  it  is  man's  sin  and  shame 
if  be  improTo  Ihe  day  no  belter  than  the  beasts  that  perish. 

TAeiig  2.  And  as  Ihe  rest  of  the  day  is  for  ihe  holiness  of  it, 
eo  is  all  the  labor  of  the  week  for  this  holy  rest ;  that  as  the  end 
of  all  the  labor  of  our  lives  is  for  our  rest  with  Christ  in  heaven, 
BO  also  of  the  six  days  of  every  week  for  the  holy  rest  of  the 
Sabbath,  (he  twilight  and  dawning  of  heaven.  For  the  eightli 
commandment,  which  would  not  have  us  steal,  commands  tis 
therefore  to  labor  for  our  families  and  comforts  in  all  the  seasons 
of  tabor.  This  fourth  command,  therefore,  which  not  only  per- 
mits but  commands  us  to  labor  six  days,  must  have  another 
respect  in  commanding  us  to  labor,  and  a  higher  end,  which  can 
not  be  any  thing  else  but  with  respect  to  the  Sabbath  ;  that  as 
we  arc  to  watch  unto  prayer,  so  we  are  to  work  unto  the  Sab- 
bath, or  so  work  all  the  week  day  that  wo  may  meet  with  God, 
and  sanctify  the  Sabbath  day. 

T^etit  8.  As  therefore  the  holiness  of  the  Sabbath  is  moral 
because  it  is  the  end  of  the  day,  so  is  the  rest  of  the  Sabbath 
(the  immediate  means  to  that  end)  moral  abo.  Look,  therefore, 
whatever  holy  duties  Ihe  Lord  required  of  the  Jews,  which  were 
not  ceremonial,  the  same  duties  he  requires  of  us  upon  this  day; 

whatever  rest  he  required  of  them  for  this  end,  he  exacts 

Christians  also. 

ITtetit  1.  Those  (hat  make  the  Sabbath  ceremonial  imagine 
BUicter  rest  imposed  ujion  the  Jews  ih      ™    •    ■ 








Im'.iiiil  1111(0,  boeause  they  place  the  ceremonial  ness  of  (lie  Sab- 
balli  in  llie  alriut  rest  of  it ;  but  we  are  Iwund  to  the  same  rest 
fur  BulujUnco  of  it;  and  ttic  ground  lor  a  stricter  rest  than  we 
ftre  bound  unio  will  be  found  too  light,  if  well  pondered. 

Theti*  b.  For,  though  it  be  said  that  the  Jews  might  not 
bake,  nor  seethe  meat  upon  (his  day,  (Ex.  xvi.  23,)  no,  nor  make 
k  fire  upon  il,  (Ex.  xxkv.  a,)  no,  nor  gather  sticks  upon  it,  with- 
out death,  (Num.  vi.  15,  3D,)  —  nil  whit-h  things  Christians  now 
mnj  lawfully  do,  —  yet  nooe  of  these  places  will  evince  that  for 
which  they  are  alleged. 

Tluwi  G.  For.  Bi-st.  it  is  not  saiil,  (Kx.  xri.  23,)  Bake  and 
seethe  tliat  to-day  which  may  serve  you  next  day ;  but,  that  which 
remains,  {viz.,  which  is  Dot  sod  nor  bnked,)  lay  it  up  until  the 
morning,  and  conact]iiently  for  the  morrow  of  the  next  day, 
which  being  thus  luid  up,  I  do  not  find  (hat  they  are  forbidden 
to  bake  or  eeelhe  that  which  remains  U])on  the  next  day :  but 
rather,  if  they  must  use  it  the  next  day,  they  might  then  bake  it 
or  seethe  it  that  day  alao,  as  ihey  did,  tliat  of  the  sixth  day,  and 
without  which  they  could  not  have  the  comfortable  use  of  it  upon 
the  Sabbath  day.  Indeed,  it  was  an  lawful  lo  grind  and  beat  the 
manna  in  mills  and  mortare,  mentioned  Num.  xi.  8,  upon  this 
day  as  now  to  thresh  and  grind  corn  this  day  ;  the  meul  there- 
fore, which  did  remain,  is  not  forbidden  to  be  baked  or  sod  upon 
this  day ;  nor  would  God's  special  and  miraculous  providence 
ftppcar  in  preserving  it  from  worms  and  stinking,  if  there  had 
been  any  baking  of  it  the  day  before,  and  not  rather  upon  the 
Sabbalh  day. 

Theiit  7.  Although  also  they  were  forbidden  to  kindle  Gk 
apon  this  day,  (Ki.  xxsv.  3,)  in  respect  of  some  use,  yet  Ihey 
■re  not  forbidden  so  to  do  in  respect  of  any  use  whatsoever. 
For  there  was  tire  kindled  for  the  Sabbath  sacrifices,  and  it  would 
been  a  breach  of  the  rule  of  meri^y,  not  to  kindle  a  fire  for 
the  sick  and  weak  in  the  wilderness.  Nehemiah  also,  a  man 
strict  and  zealous  for  the  .Sabbath,  yol  had  such  provision 
made  every  diiy  as  could  not  be  dressed  nor  eaten  without  some 
Are  upon  the  Sabbath  day,  (Neh.  r.  18;)  and  the  Sabbalh  not 
being  a  fast,  but  a  feast  in  those  times  as  well  as  these,  hence  it 
tl  not  unsuitable  to  the  time  to  have  comfortable  provisions  made 
,'l«tdy,  provided  thai  the  dressing  of  meat  be  not  an  ordinary 
[iUnderance  to  public  or  private  duties  of  holiness  upon  this  day, 
(Ex.  xii.  16:)  ihis  kindling  of  the  Are  here  forbidden  must  there* 
ure  be  understood  in  respect  of  ihc  scope  of  the  [ilace,  viz.,  not 
U  kindle  a  fire  for  any  servile  work,  no,  not  in  respect  of  ihia 
particular  use  of  ii,  vix..  lo  further  the  building  of  the  sanctuarj 


And  tabernacle,  made  meniinn  of  in  ihia  diapter  ;  for  it  is  said^ 
whosoever  shall  do  any  work  therein  (i.  e,,  any  servile  work,  whicb 
is  more  proper  Tor  the  week  lime)  shall  be  put  to  denth,  (rer 
2 ;)  there  is,  therefore,  eiihur  no  dependence  of  these  words  in 
the  third  Terse  with  those  in  the  second,  or  else  we  must  under- 
slnnd  it  of  kindling  fires  rrstrictiTely  for  any  serrile  work,  whiel 
ia  there  forbidden  not  only  the  Jewa,  hut  us  Christians  also. 

TTifM  8.  The  man  lliat  gathered  sticks  on  the  Stibhath  (Num. 
XV.  30)  viae  put  to  death.  What !  for  gathering  of  sticks  only  ? 
Why  then  did  not  the  just  God  put  ihem  to  death  who  were  the 
first  otfenders,  (and  therefore  most  fit  to  be  made  examples,)  who 
went  out  to  gather  manna  upon  Ibb  da;  ?  (Ex.xvi.)  Thisgalh- 
ering  of  sticks,  therefore,  though  little  in  itself,  yei  seems  to  be 
aggravated  hy  presumption  ;  aiid  tliat  the  man  did  pnsumpluou3-> 
ly  break  the  Sabbath,  and  therefore  it  is  generally  observed,  tlial 
this  very  example  follows  the  law  of  punishing  a  preBumptuoua 
transgressor  with  death  in  this  very  diapter :  and  though  it  be 
said  that  they  found  a  man  gathering  sticks,  as  if  it  were  done 
secretly,  and  not  presumptuously,  yet  we  know  that  presamp- 
tuotis  sins  may  be  committed  secretly  as  well  ns  openly,  though 
they  are  not  in  so  high  n  degree  presumptuous  as  when  they  are 
done  more  openly  :  the  fear  of  the  law  against  Sahbatb  breakers 
might  restnun  the  man  from  doing  tltut  <^nly  whi«^  before 
God  was  done  proudly  and  presumptuously ;  and  tliough  Moses 
doubted  what  to  do  with  the  man,  who  had  that  capital  law 
pven  him  before  against  Stkbbath  breakers,  yet  they  might  be 
ignorant  for  a  time  of  the  full  and  true  meaning  of  it,  which  the 
Lord  here  seems  to  expound,  Tiz^  that  a  Sabbath  breaker  sinning 
presumptuously  is  to  be  put  to  death;  and  although  it  be  doubted 
whether  such  a  law  is  not  too  rigorous  in  tliese  times,  yet  we  da 
see  that  where  the  mi^strate  neglects  to  tvstrain  from  this  sin, 
the  Lord  takes  the  magislntie's  work  into  his  own  hand,  and 
many  times  cuts  them  off  suddenly  who  profane  his  Sabballi 
presumptuously  ;  and  it  is  worth  inquiring  into,  whether  pre^ 
sumptuous  Sabbath  breakers  are  not  still  to  be  put  to  death; 
which  1  doubt  not  but  tliac  the  Lord  will  either  one  day  clear  up, 
or  else  dis<«ver  some  specialty  in  the  application  of  this  judicial 
law,  to  that  polity  of  the  Jews,  as  moet  tit  for  ibem,  and  not  so  uni- 
versally fit  for  all  others  in  Christian  commonwealths ;  but  this 
latter  I  yet  see  no  proof  for ;  nor  do  I  expect  the  clearing  up  of 
the  other  while  the  temper  of  (he  times  is  loose  and  lukewarm. 

7%etti  9.  Considering,  therefore,  that  some  work  may  be 
done  upon  the  Sabbath,  and  some  not,  and  that  man's  heart  ia 
apt  to  run  to  extremes,  either  lo  gross  profaneness  or  pliarisaica^ 




^^M  atriclncj^  we  are  ihcrerore  to  inrjuire  what  works  we  must  n 
^H  from,  anil  whni  not  from,  upon  ihu  8iibt>itili  dtiy. 
^  Thftit  10.  If  ihc  Smiiiures  may  be  jodge  herein,  we  ebaU 
find  that  wlien  ihpy  forliid  all  manner  of  work,  they  inteqiret 
this  of  servile  work.  The  work  forhidderi  in  Itie  annual  Sab- 
balbs,  (which  did  bul  shadow  out  the  rest  on  liiis  Sabbath,}  it  is 
servile  work,  (Lev.  xxiii.  7,  8 ;)  and  henee  the  rest  on  llie  Sab- 
bath (in  this  fourth  command)  is  opposed  lo  the  labor  on  the 
week  days,  which  is  propisrly  servile,  lawful  to  be  done  then,  but 
unlawful  upon  the  Siibbidb  duy. 

ThetU  II.  The  schoolmen  and  some  of  their  late  idolixers, 
(like  the  Pharisees  of  old,)  ever  blind  in  interpreting  the  spirit- 
aalnees  of  the  hiw  of  God,  describe  a  senile  work  in  that  man- 
ner, so  ae  that  the  grinding  of  waiermills  and  windmilbi,  as 
Iabo  the  counsels  of  lawyers  to  their  client^  the  herring  trade  of 
Ishermen,  are  with  ihera  no  BCrvJIe  works  on  this  day  ;  and  in- 
deed they  scarce  make  any  work  servile,  but  what  is  slavish  and 
•xternal  bondage  and  burden. 
Thait  12.  But  if  we  consult  with  Scriptures  and  the  very 
words  of  this  fourth  commandment,  we  shall  tind  two  things  con- 
eurring  to  make  up  a  servile  work:  1.  If  any  work  be  done 
fer  any  worldly  gain,  profit,  or  H«e1ibood,  to  acquire  and  pur- 
ahase  the  things  of  this  life  bv,  (which  is  the  principal  end  of 
week-day  Ubor,  Eph.  Iv.  28;'l  Thess.  iv.  12.)  this  is  a  servile 
work,  all  one  with  what  the    commandment  c^Its  "  thy  work," 

»  Hence  buying,  selling,  sowing,  reaping,  which  are  done  for 
worldly  gain,  are  unlawful  on  this  day,  being  therefore  servile 
works :  hence  also  worlilly  sports  and  pastimes  (which  are  or- 
dained of  God  to  whet  on  worldly  labor,  not  necessary  every 
dty.  hm  only  at  some  seasons)  are  therefore  most  proper  appur- 
tenances unto  days  of  labor,  and  are  therefore  unlawful  upon 
Ibis  day.  Iluly  limes  are  no  more  to  be  sported  on  than  holy 
plaresi  hence  alto,  on  the  other  side,  to  rub  the  ears  of  corn,  to 

»  dress  meat  for  cumfortnble  nourishment  of  man,  becau.^e  they 
respect  not  worldly  gain,  are  no  servile  works,  nor  yet  unlawful, 
kat  may  be  more  lawfully  done  for  the  comfort  of  man  than  to 
lead  his  horse  to  the  water  this  day,  (Luke  vi.  2,  and  xiii.  lA, 
and  xiv.  5 ;)  hence  also  such  works  as  are  done  only  for  the  pres- 
ervation of  the  creatures,  as  to  pult  a  sheep  out  of  a  dituh,  to 
quench  fire  in  a  town,  to  save  com  and  hay  from  the  sudden  in- 
undation of  water,  to  keep  fire  in  the  iron  mills,  to  sit  at  stern  and 
guide  the  ship,  and  a  thousand  such  like  actions,  (being  not  done 
properly  for  worldly  gain,)  are  not  unlawful ;  God  himself  not 
WMios  from  works  of  presBrvatiun.  when  h«  did  from  tli9f»  ff 


258  TUB  s.»JiCTiriCATi(jjj  or  riiE  SAiiitATH.  ' 

creation  ;  hence  also  bupH  workfi  as  nre  not  works  of  immediate 
worsliip,  but  only  required  ncceKanly  llicreio,  os  killing  ibe  sac- 
rifices in  the  Ittnple,  traveling  a  Snbtmlb  day's  journey  to  the 
public  assemblies,  being  no  servilu  works  for  outward  gain,  ara 
not  unlawful  upon  tliiK  day. 

2.  Such  worldly  works,  which  (hough  ihey  be  not  done  for 
worldly  gain  or  profit,  yet  if  by  a  provident  care  and  foresight 
they  might  be  done  an  well  the  week  before,  or  may  as  well  be 
done  a  week  after  the  Sabbath,  these  also  ore  servile  works;  for 
thus  the  eommandment  cxpresselh  it :  "  Six  days  lliou  mayest  do 
ull  thy  work,"  (meaning  whinh  can  be  done  as  well  the  week  be- 
fore.) and  if  all  can  not  be  done,  it  may  therefore  be  as  well  done 
tlie  week  afi«r.  Hence  the  building  of  the  tabernacle,  (which 
was  not  so  much  for  man's  profit  as  God's  honor,)  because  it 
might  be  done  upon  the  six  days  seasonably  enough,  hence  it  is 
prohibited  upon  the  Sabbath  day.  (Kx.  xxxi.)  If  a  man  hath 
C(»ii  in  the  Aeld,  tliough  be  may  pretend  that  tlic  weather  is  un- 
certain, and  il  is  ready  lo  be  brought  into  the  barn,  yel  he  is  not 
to  fetch  it  in  upon  the  iSabbaih  day,  because  there  is  uo  imminent 
danger  of  spoil  the  Monday  alter,  and  then  ho  may  fetch  it  as 
well  as  upon  that  day  ;  the  like  may  be  said  concerning  seamen's 
setting  sail  upon  the  Sabbath  day,  though  they  be  uncertain  of  a 
fair  gale  upon  the  dny  after.  Yet  we  must  trust  God'a  providence, 
who  almost  in  all  such  matters  keeps  us  at  uncertainties  ;  hence 
also  the  sweeping  of  the  house  ought  not  to  be  done  now,  if  it 
may  as  well  be  done  the  day  before ;  so  ulbO  to  buy  any  things  at 
shops,  or  to  wash  clothes  ;  if  they  may  be  done  the  week  before 
or  after,  they  must  not  be  done  upon  this  day  ;  hence,  on  the 
other  side,  works  of  necessity,  which  can  not  be  so  eoiivenienlly 
done  the  day  before  or  after,  are  not  unlawful  upon  this  day,  aa 
lo  lly  in  persecution,  to  watch  the  city,  to  fight  with  the  enemy. 
(Hatt  xxiv.  24.  2  Kings  i.  2.)  Hence  also  works  of  necessity, 
not  only  for  preservation  of  life,  but  also  for  comfort  and  comeli- 
ness of  life,  are  not  unlawful ;  tor  it  is  a  gross  mistake  lo  think 
tliat  works  only  of  absolute  necessity  are  allowed  only  upon  this 
duy  ;  for  lo  lead  an  ok  to  water,  which  in  the  strictest  times  was 
not  disallowed  of,  is  not  of  atraoluie  necessity,  for  it  may  live 
more  than  a  day  without  it ;  only  it  is  necessary  for  the  comfort 
of  the  life  of  the  beast :  how  much  more  is  allowed  to  the  comfort 
of  the  life  of  man  !  Thedisciples  possibly  might  have  lived  longer 
than  the  Sabbath  without  rubbing  com  ears,  and  men  may  live 
on  Sabbath  days  generally  without  warm  meat,  yea,  tbey  may  fast 
perhaps  all  that  day  ;  yet  it  is  not  unlawful  to  eat  such  meat,  becausa 
it  JB.necessary  for  the  comfort  of  life,     Henpe  4]bo  lo  put  on  comely 


I  garaientit,  to  WAfh  hands  nnd  face,  nnd  many  such  -things  as  are 
r  necessary  Tor  the  i-omeliness  as  well  as  llie  comrort  of  life,  nre 
[  not  unlawful  now ;  there  is  sometimes  an  inevitable  neressily  hy 
L  God's  pniviilence.  and  sometimes  a  contracted  necessity  through 
I  want  of  care  and  foresight :  in  this  case  the  work  may  sometimes 
I  be  done,  provided  that  our  neglect  beforeliand  be  repented  of:  in 
L'SiTonl,  h<>  that  shall  conscientiously  endeavor  that  no  more  work 
Kite  done  on  the  Sabbath  than  what  must  be  done  for  the  ends  men- 
T'tjoned,  Ihat  so  he  may  have  nothing  else  to  do  hut  to  be  with 
r  God  that  day,  shall  have  much  peace  to  his  own  conscience  here- 
r  In.  against  Satan's  clamors  :  tieiu'e.  lastly,  not  only  outward  sci^ 
['  vile  work,  but  gcrrilc  thoughts,  affections,  and  cares,  are  to  be 
.1  off  this  day  front  the  sight  of  God,  as  others  are  from  the 
['  eyes  of  men  ;  senrile  thoughts  and  affections  being  as  much 
I  against  the  fourth  commandment  as  unchaste  and  filthy  thoughts 
I  apiinit  the  seventh. 

E  Thetit  13.  That  we  are  to  abstain  from  all  servile  work,  not 
[.  to  much  in  regard  of  the  hare  abstinence  from  work,  but  that 
\  haviug  no  work  of  our  own  to  mind  or  do,  we  might  be  wholly 
I  taken  up  with  God's  work,  being  wholly  taken  off  from  our  own 
L  that  he  may  speak  with  us,  and  reveal  himself  more  fully  and 
^  fiimiliarly  (o  ua,  (as  friends  do  when  ibcy  get  alone,}  having 
catled  and  carried  us  out  of  the  noise  and  crowd  of  all  worldly 
occasion s  and  things. 

Thtrit  14.     Holy  rest,  therefore,  being  for  holy  work,  it  may 
not  be  amiss  to  inquire  what  this  work  is,  and  wherein   it  con- 
sieu  \  for  which  end  I  shall  not  instance  in  any  the  particular 
Kveral  duties,  in  public  and  private,  of  holiness  and  mercy,  be- 
cause this  is  to  be  found  in  uU  who  write  upon  this  subject.     I 
■ball  only  speak  of  lhat  kind  of  holiness  which  the  Lord  requires 
I  in  all  public  and  private  duties,  and  is  to  run  throngh  them,aiii]nsit 
t  were  animate  them  ;  and  in  truth  to  find  out  this,  and  ob«erve  this, 
<■  im  one  of  the  greatest  difficulties  (but  yet  the  greatest  excellency) 
of  a  Christian  life.     It  consists  therefore  in  these  five  thing* : — 
TlirtU  \h.     The  first :  the  holiness  upon  this  day  ought  to  1» 
immediate.     I  do  not  mean  without  the  use  of  public  or  privtue 
means,  but  in  respect  of  worldly  things  ;  for  we  are  commanded 
to  be  holy  in  all  manner  of  conversation  all  the  week  in  our 
worldly  affairs.  (1  Pet.  i.  17.)      Holiness   is  to  be  writ    upon 
our  cups,  and  pots,  and  horse  bridles,,  and  plows,  and  sickles, 
(Z«cb.  xiv.  20,  21 ;)  but  this  holiness  is  more  immediate;  wa 





enjoy  God  by  and  i 
I  and  providences ;  bnt  do  we  think  that  thi 
.^mjaii^  upon  the  Uubbath  ?     Verily,  every  day  then  should  bo 

e  hulines* 





our  Christian  Salibath,  which  is  most  fnl^e  ;  end  ihervfore  some 
more  immediiite  holiness  is  rcqiilretJ  now  mi  [his  day  which  is  not 
then,  nor  required  of  us  every  week  day  ;  and  whal  can  ibis  be 
but  dr&wing  near  to  God  this  day  more  imraediuiely,  and  as  near 
as  mortal  man  can  do,  and  casting  aside  the  world,  and  getting 
out  of  it,  and  so  to  be  near  God  in  prayer,  in  hearing  the  word, 
in  meditation,  etc.?  (Ps.  xcv.  .%  6.)  If  it  were  possible  to  bo 
with  and  enjoy  Christ  in  heaven  where  lliero  are  no  means,  we 
should  this  duy  long  for  it,  and  prize  it ;  but  because  tlii»  can  not 
yet  be,  and  lliat  the  Lord  comes  down  from  heavea  to  us  in  hia 
ordinances,  and  thereby  makes  himself  ns  near  to  us  as  be  can  in 
this  frail  life,  hence  we  are  not  only  to  draw  near  to  ordinances, 
but  to  Giod  and  Christ  in  thera,  upon  this  day,  and  so  he  as  near 
them  with  greatest  immediaieness  that  we  can.  (Vs.  xlii.  1,  2; 
Ixiii.  1-3.)  Adam  did  enjoy  God  in  his  calling  the  week  day, 
but  this  was  not  so  immediate  as  he  was  to  have  upon  ilie  Sab- 
hath  day. 

T/ietii  IC.  The  second  is,  this  holiness  ought  not  only  to  be 
immediate,  but  also  special,  and  in  our  endeavors  afler  the  high- 
eel  degree,  and  with  the  greatest  intention  of  holiness ;  for  we  are 
bound  every  day  lo  be  holy  in  more  immediate  and  near  ap- 
proaches to  God  some  time  or  other  of  the  day  ;  but  now  we  are 
culled  to  !«  more  specially  holy,  because  both  the  day  and  our- 
selves are  uow  set  apart  for  it  in  a  more  special  manner.  We 
are  to  love,  fear,  delight  in  God,  and  pray  to  him,  and  muse  on 
him  every  day,  but  now  in  a  more  special  manner  all  these  are 
lo  be  done.  The  Sabbath  is  not  only  called  "  holy,"  but "  holiness 
lo  lliu  Lord,"  (Ex.  xxxi.  15  ;)  whicii  shows  that  the  day  b  exceed- 
ing holy,  and  suitably  our  affections  and  hearts  ought  therefore 
BO  to  be.  The  Bacrifiee  on  this  day  was  to  be  doubled.  {Num. 
xxviii.  9.)  The  Lord  would  have  double  honor  from  us  this 
day ;  that  as  in  the  week  lime  we  are  sinfully  drowned  in  the 
cares  of  this  world,  and  affections  thereto,  so  upon  every  ^ubbath 
we  should  be  in  a  holy  mtinner  drowned  in  the  cares,  and  thoughts, 
and  afl'ections  of  the  things  of  God ;  and  hence  we  are  com- 
manded lo  call  the  Sabbath  our  delight,  and  not  to  think  our  own  , 
thoughts,  or  do  our  own  works  this  day.  (Is.  Iviii.  13.)  David 
said  (Ps.  xliii.  4)  that  he  would  go  to  the  altar  of  God,  (the 
placts  of  public  worship,)  to  God  his  joy,  yea,  his  exceeding  joy; 
HO  are  we  not  only  to  draw  near  to  altar,  word,  sacraments, 
prayer,but  to  God  in  them  ;  nay,  to  God  in  them  as  our  exceed- 
ing joy,  our  exceeding  love,  our  exceeding  fear,  etc.,  especially 
upon  this  day.  There  is  scarce  any  week  but  we  contract  soil 
from  our  worldly  occasions,  and  by  touching  worldly  things ;   and 



er  mnny  decays,  and  lose  much  ground  by  (emptaliona 

Now,  the  Lord  pilying  us,  and  giving  us  a  Sabbath  of 

y,  whftl  should  we  Uo  now  but  return,  recover,  and  renew 

r  strenglh,  nnd,  like  the  eagle,  cnst  our  bills,  and  tiiund  before 

r  God  und  King  this  day  of  state  and  royal  majesty,  when  all 

i  compass  his  llirone  and  presence,  with  our  moet  beau- 

Tul  gnnaenls,  mourning  especiaUy  that  we  fnll  bo  far  short  of 

Jabbath  ucis  and  services  ?     We  shnuld  not  content  ourselves 

Evilb  working-day  holinesa,  joys,  fears,  hopes,  prayers,  pmiaes ; 

wbat  Sabbath  Joys,  fears,  praises,  must  be  now  our  om&menls,  and 

K^  within  us  must  be  rttised  up  to  a  higher  strain ;  that  aa  God 

Knives  us  this  day,  special  grace,  means  of  grace,  seasons  of  grace, 

f  Ipecial  occasions  of  grace,  by  reviewing  all  our  experiences  the 

Kiveek  past,  m  there  is  good  reason  that  the  Lord  should  be  hon- 

[  ored  with  special  holiness  this  day. 

Tresis  17.     The  third  ia,  this  holiness  ought  to  bo  not  only 

immediate  and  special,  but  constant  and  continued,  the  whole  day 

together.     For  upon  every  day  of  the  week  we  are  to  loke  some 

time  for  converse  with  God ;  but  our  worldly  occasions  soon  call 

va  off,  and  that  lawfully  i  but  Sabbath  holiness  must  be  constant 

and  continued  all  the  day.    If  the  Lord  was  so  strict  that  he 

would  not  loee  a  moment's  honor  in  a  ceremonial  day  of  rest, 

w  (Lev.  u^iii.  32,)  what  shall  we  tbink  the  Lord  expects  upon 

■Bis  day  which  is  moral  ?     The  Lord  would  not  be  honored  tliia 

Ediy  only  by  fits,  and  flashes,  and  sudden  pangs,  which  pass  away 

I  f  (he  early  dew,  but  as  it  ra  in  the  psalm  for  the  Sabbath.  "It  is 

good  to  sing  of  his  loving  kindness  in  the  morning,  and  of  his 

faithfulness  every  nighi,"  (Ps.  xcii.  1,  '2i)  and  though  this  be  a 

wearisome  ibing  to  the  flesh  to  be  so  long  pent  in,  and  although 

we  can  not  perfectly  do  it,  yet  it  is  a  most  sweet  and  glorious 

work  in  itself,  to  think  that  the  infinite  glorious  God  should  call  a 

poor,  sinlul  creature  to  be  with  him  and  attend  upon  him  all  the 

day  long;  to  be  ever  with  the  Lord  is  best  of  all;  but  next  to 

that  to  be  with  him  a  whole  day  together.     They  that  see  how 

fit  ibey  are  to  be  forever  bauislied  from  the  presence  of  the  Most 

High,  and  how  exceeding  unworthy  to  come  into  it,  can  not  but 

infinitely  tmd  excessively  prize  tluit  love  of  Jesus  Christ,  this  day 

to  come  and  enter  into  his  rest,  and  lie  in  his  very  bosom  all  the 

I  dity  long,  and  as  a  most  loving  friend  loth  to  part  with  them  till 

rneedH  must  and  that  ibc  day  is  done. 

~      r  lU.     The  fourth  if,  this  holiness  ought  nut  only  to  be 

I  inmediHie,  special,  and  constant,  but  all  those  holy  duties  are  thus 

~0  be  performed  of  us  as  that  hereby  we  may  enter  into  rest :  so  as 

I  tiwt  our  souls  nitty  Itnd  and  feel  the  sweet  of  the  true  rest  of  the 







Sl^  xnK  sANrTit-icATiON  or  TnF.  sabiiath. 

Sabbath;  and  thrrpfore  it  must  be  n  sweet  and  quieting  bolinesa 
also;  for  the  Sabbath  is  not  only  called  a  Sitbbaih  of  n 
iipect  of  our  exemption  from  bodily  labor,  but  because  i 
be  sanctified,  as  lliat  on  this  day  we  enter  into  rest,  or  such  a 
fruition  of  tiod  as  gives  rest  to  our  souls ;  otherwise  n 
sanctify  a  Sabbath  aright,  because  wc  then  fall  short  of  this,  which 
ii  the  main  end  thereof,  until  we  come  so  to  seek  God  as  that  we 
find  him,  and  so  find  him  as  llint  we  feel  TC»t  in  him,  in  drawing 
neiir  to  him  and  standing;  before  him  ;  that  oa  God,  ot^er  his  six 
days'  labor,  did  rest,  and  was  rcfreRhed  in  tlic  fruition  of  himself, 
so  should  we,  afrer  our  six  days'  labor,  also  be  refreshed  in  tho 
presence  of  the  Lord ;  that  in  case  we  want  means  upon  the 
Sabbath,  yet  he  may  be  in  lieu  of  ihem  unto  uaj  and  in  case  wa 
Itare  them,  and  find  but  liiile  by  them  conveyed  to  us,  yet  that  by 
that  little  we  may  be  carried  on  the  win^  of  feith  beyond  all 
means  unto  that  rest  which  upon  this  day  we  may  find  in  his 
bosom  i  that  as  Christ,  after  his  labors,  entered  into  liis  rest,  (ITeb, 
iv.,)  so  we  ought  to  labor  after  the  same  Sabbatism  begun  here  on 
earth,  but  perfected  in  heaven  i  that  after  all  the  weary  steps  we 
tread,  and  sins  and  sorrows  we  find  all  the  week,  yet  when  the  SaV 
bath  cornea  we  may  say.  Reinm  unto  thy  rest.O  my  soul.  The  end 
of  all  labor  is  rest ;  so  the  end  of  all  our  bodily  and  spiritna)  labor, 
whether  on  the  week  days  or  Sabbath  day,  it  should  be  this  rest; 
and  we  should  never  think  that  we  have  reached  the  end  of  the 
day  until  we  taste  the  rest  of  the  day.  Nor  is  this  rest  a  meteor 
in  tbe  air,  and  a  thing  only  to  be  wished  for,  but  can  never  bo 
found;  but  assuredly  those  who  are  wearied  with  their  sing  in 
the  week  and  wants  on  the  Sabbath,  and  feel  a  need  of  rest  and 
refreshing,  shall  cei'tainly  have  the  blessing,  viz.,  the  rest  of  these 
seasons  of  refreshing  and  rest,  and  Ihe  comforts  of  the  Holy 
fihoBl  filling  their  bearls  this  day.  (Is,  1.  2-4 ;  Ivi.  5-8 :  Iviii. 
13,  14.  Ps.  xxxvi.  7,  8.)  Not  because  of  our  holiness,  which  la 
spotted  at  the  best,  but  because  of  our  great  High  Priest's  holiness, 
who  hath  it  written  upon  his  forehead  to  lake  away  the  int((uily 
of  all  our  holy  offerings,  (£k.  xsviii.  SG,  38 ;)  and  who  hatb  gar- 
ments of  grace  and  blood  to  cover  us,  and  to  present  us  spoilers 
before  the  face  of  that  God  whom  we  seek  and  serve  with  much 
weakness,  and  wliom  at  last  we  Ehalt  find,  when  our  short  day's 
work  here  is  done,  and  our  long-look ed-for  Sabbath  of  glory  shall 
begin  to  dawn. 

TAeti$  19.  Now,  when  the  Lord  hath  inclined  us  thus  to  rest 
and  sanctify  his  Sabbath,  what  should  the  last  act  of  our  bolinesa 
be  but  diffusive  and  communicative,  viz.,  in  doing  our  utmost  that 
others  under  us.  or  that  have  relation  to  us,  that  they  sanctify  the 




8ub1)atli  also,  ncTOrding  to  Ihe  Lord's  express  |Hirtiuil:ir  cburge 

in  the  uummaiidment,  "Thou,  thy  Bun,  thy  dituglUer,  thy  aervanls, 

the  stranger  irithin  ihy  gates  "F    The  exwilcucy  of  Chrixt's 

,   boUness  consists  in  makiag  us  like  himaeir  in  holiness ;  the  escel- 

r  leney  and  glory  of  a  Christian's  hoUnetH  is  to  endeavor  to  be  like 

'  to  the  Lord  Christ  therein  :  our  children,  sert'ttnts,  strangers  who 

ftre  within  our  gates,  are  apt  to  profane  the  Sabbath ;  we  are 

therefore  to  improve  our  power  over  them  for  God,  in  restraining 

them  from  sin,  and  in  constraining  them  (as  far  as  we  can)  lo  the 

holy  observance  of  the  rest  of  the  Sabbath,  iest  God  impute  their 

Bins  to  us,  who  had  power  (as  Eli  in  the  like  case)  to  restrain 

them  and  did  not ;  and  so  our  families  and  conscieocea  be  stuined 

with  their  guitt  and  blood. 

Thait  20.  And  if  superiors  in  families  are  U>  see  their  galea 
preserved  unspotted  from  such  provoking  evils,  can  any  think 
but  tliat  the  same  bond  lies  upon  superiors  in  common  wealths, 
who  arc  the  fathers  of  those  great  families,  whose  subjects  also 
arc  within  their  gntes,  and  the  power  of  their  jurisdictions  ?  The 
civil  magistrate,  though  he  hath  no  power  to  imjiose  new  laws 
upon  the  consciences  of  bis  subjects,  yet  be  is  bound  to  see  that 
the  laws  of  God  be  kept  by  all  his  subjects;  provided  always, 
that  herein  he  walk  according  to  the  law  and  rule  of  God,  v\t,, 
Ihal,  1,  ignopant  consciences  in  clear  and  momculous  matters  be 
first  instructed;  %,  doubting  consciences  have  sufficient  means 
of  being  resolved ;  8.  bold  and  audacious  consciences  be  first 
forewarned.  Hence  it  is,  that  though  he  hath  no  power  to  make 
holy  days,  and  to  impose  the  observation  of  them  upon  the  con- 
Bci^nces  of  bis  subjects,  (because  these  are  his  own  laws,)  yet  be 
may  and  should  see  that  the  Sabbath  day,  (tlie  Lord's  lioly  day,) 
that  this  be  observed,  because  he  doth  but  see  to  the  execution 
of  God's  commandment  herein. 

Ity  wimt  rule  did  Nehemiah  not  only  forbid  the  breach  of  the 
iiabbalh.  but  did  also  threaten  bodily  punishment  upon  the  men 
of  Tyre  ?  (although  llicy  were  heathens,  yet  were  they  at  this 
I   time  within  the  gales  and  compass  of  his  jurisdiction,  Neh.  xiii. 
Certainly  he  thought  himself  bound  in  conscience  to  see 
\  that  the  Sabbalb  should  not  be  profaned  by  any  that  were  within 
hia  gates,  according  to  this  fourth  commandment.     If  kings,  and 
princes,  and  civil  magbiralet  have  nothing  to  do  in  matters  of  the 
first  table,  (and  consequently  must  give  any  man  liberty  lo  pro- 
fane the  Sabbatli  that  pretends  conscience,)  why  then  doth  Jer- 
emy call  upon  princes  lo  see  that  it  be  not  profaned,  with  prom- 
I   iw  uf  having  their  crowns  and  kingdoms  preserved  from  wrulk 
L  if  thus  they  do,  and  with  threatening  the  burning  up  and  oon- 




suminj;  of  cily  anil  kingdom  if  (bin  (hej  do  not  ?  (Jer.  xvii.  19, 
S5,  27.)  If  civil  magisCrniei)  have  noiliing  lo  do  herein,  they 
then  hitve  nothing  lo  do  lo  preserve  ihcir  crovraa,  kingdoms,  scep- 
ters, subjecia,  from  lire  and  blood,  and  utter  ruin.  Nehemiab  was 
no  type  of  Christ,  nor  were  the  kings  of  Israel  bound  lo  see  the 
Sabbaib  kept  aa  types  of  Christ,  but  as  nursing  fathers  of  the 
common  wealth,  and  because  their  own  subjects  were  within  their 
gales,  and  under  their  power;  and  therefore,  according  to  this 
moral  rule  of  the  commandment,  they  were  Lound  not  only  to 
keep  it  themselves,  but  to  see  that  all  others  did  so  also.  Il  is 
true  civil  niagislrntcs  may  alnise  tlieir  power,  judge  amiss,  and 
think  that  to  be  the  command  of  God  which  is  not;  but  we  must 
not  therefore  take  away  their  power  from  them,  because  they 
may  pervert  it  and  abuse  it;  we  mast  not  deny  that  power  they 
have  for  GoA,  becnuse  they  may  pervert  it  and  turn  llie  edfre  of  it 
against  God ;  for  if  upon  tliis  ground  tlie  magistrate  hath  no 
power  over  his  eulijecls  in  matters  of  the  first  table,  he  may  have 
also  all  his  leathers  pulled  from  him,  and  all  his  power  taken 
from  him  in  matters  of  the  second  table ;  for  we  know  that  he 
may  work  strange  changes  there,  and  pervert  justice  and  judg- 
ment exceedingly ;  we  must  not  deny  their  power,  because  they 
may  turn  it  awry,  and  hurt  God's  churcli  and  people  by  it,  but 
(as  the  apostle  exhorts,  1  Tim.  ii.  1,  2)  lo  pray  for  them  th« 
more,  that  under  them  we  may  live  a  peaceable  life  in  all  godli* 
Inesa  and  honesty :  it  is  a  thousand  times  better  to  suffer  perse- 
P  culion  for  riglileousness'  sake  and  for  a  good  conscience,  than  to 
desire  and  ple^  for  toleration  of  all  consciences,  that  so  (by  this 
cowardly  device  and  lukewarm  principle)  our  own  may  be  un- 
touched :  it  was  never  heard  of,  until  now  of  late,  that  any  of 
God's  prophets,  apostles,  martyrs,  faithful  witnessess,  etc.,  that 
they  ever  pleaded  for  liberty  in  error,  but  only  for  the  trutl^ 
whicli  they  preached  and  prayed  for,  and  suffered  for  unto  the 
death  ;  and  their  sufferings  for  the  truth  with  zeal,  patience,  faith, 
constancy,  have  done  more  good  than  the  way  of  universal  toler- 
ation is  like  lo  do,  which  is  purposely  invented  to  avoid  trou- 
ble. Truth  hath  ever  spread  by  opposition  and  persecution  ;  but 
I  error,  being  a  child  of  Satan,  hath  fled,  by  a  aealous  resbting 

Sick  and  weak  men  are  to  be  tendered  much,  but  lunatic  and 
frantic  men  arc  in  best  case  when  they  are  well  fettered  and  bound : 
a  weak  conscience  is  lo  be  tendered,  n  humble  conscience  toler- 
ated ;  errors  of  weakness,  not  wickedness,  are  with  all  gentleness 
lo  be  handled ;  (he  liberty  given  in  the  reign  of  Episcopacy  for 
sports,  and  pastimes,  and  may  games,  upon  the  Lord's  day,  was 



tmee  loathsome  to  ull  lionest  mindit ;  but  now  to  allow  a  greater 
lilwriy  to  buy,  sell,  plow,  cart,  thri^h,  sport  upon  the  Sabbath  day, 
to  all  thoRe  who  pretend  conscience,  or  rathpr  that  they  have  no 
conscience  of  one  day  more  than  another,  is  to  l)uild  up  Jericho 
and  Babel  a|rain,  and  to  lay  foundations  of  wrath  to  ihe  land ;  for 
Grod  will  certainly  revenge  the  poltutiong  of  liia  .SabballiB :  if  God 
be  troubled  in  his  rest,  no  wonder  if  he  disturbs  our  peace :  some 
of  ihe  ancients  think  that  Ihe  Lord  brought  the  flood  of  waters 
upon  Ihe  Sabbath  day,  as  they  gather  from  Oen.  vii.  10,  hccausfl 
they  were  grown  to  be  great  profaner*  of  the  Sabbath  ;  and  wo 
know  that  Prague  was  taken  upon  this  day.  The  day  of  their 
sin  began  all  their  sorrows,  which  are  continued  ID  this  day,  to 
the  Mnazement  of  the  world.  When-  the  time  comes  that  the 
Iiord'g  precious  Sabbaths  are  the  days  of  God's  church's  rest, 
then  shall  come  in  the  church's  peace.  (Ps.  cii.  13,  14.)  The 
freo  grace  of  Christ  must  first  begin  herein  with  us,lhat  we  may 
find  at  last  tliat  rest  which  this  evil  world  is  not  yet  like  19  see, 
unless  it  speedily  love  his  law  more,  and  his  Sabbaths  belter. 

I  could  therefore  desire  to  conclude  this  doctrine  uf  the  Sab- 
bath with  tears,  and  I  wish  it  might  be  matter  of  bitter  lamenia' 
tion  to  Ihe  mourners  in  Sion,  every  where  to  behold  (he  universal 
profanation  of  Ihesti  precious  times  and  seasons  of  refreshilig, 
toward  which,  through  the  abounding  of  iniquity,  the  love  of 
many,  who  once  seemed  zealous  for  them,  is  now  grown  cold  :  th« 
Lonl  might  have  suffered  poor,  worthletis,  sorrowful  man  to  have 
worn  ami  wasted  out  all  his  days  in  ibis  life  in  weariness,  grief,  and 
labor,  and  to  have  filled  his  days  with  nothing  else  but  work,  and 
minding  of  his  own  things,  and  bearing  bis  own  ncccsnary  cum- 
bers and  burdens  here,  and  never  have  allowed  him  a  day  of  rest 
until  he  came  up  to  heaven  at  the  end  of  his  life ;  and  thus  to 
have  done  would  have  been  infinite  mercy  and  love,  though  he 
had  made  him  grind  the  mill  only  of  his  own  occasions,  and  feel 
Ihe  whip  and  the  lash  only  of  his  daily  griefs  and  labors,  until 
dark  night  came ;  but  such  is  ihe  overflowing  and  aliundanl  love 
of  a  blessed  God,  that  it  can  not  contain  itself  (as  it  were)  ra 
longa  time  from  special  fellowship  with  his  people  here  in  asinuigo 
luid,  and  in  an  evil  world,  and  therefore  will  have  some  special 
times  of  special  fellowship  and  sweetest  mutual  cmbrocings ;  and 
this  tJme  must  not  be  a  moment,  an  hour,  a  little,  and  then  away 
■gain  ;  but  a  whole  day,  that  there  may  be  time  enough  to  have 
Uieir  fill  of  love  in  eitdi  other's  bosom  before  they  part :  this  day 
must  not  be  mcruly  occasional  at  human  liberty,  and  now  and  then, 
lest  it  bo  too  seldom,  and  so  struugcnesg  grow  between  them ;  hut 
the  Lord  (who  exceeds  and  excels  poor  man  in  love)  therefore  to 
VOL.  1U.  23 


I26G  TilE   SANUIIFICATION    U('    THE    t^AISDATtl.  ^H 

make  all  sure,  he  sets  nnd  Hxetli  the  duy,  and  nppointa  the  time.  ^M 

■nd  how  to  meet,  merely  out  of  love,  that  weary  man  may  enjoy  ^H 

kis  rest,  his  God,  his  love,  his  heaven,  as  much  and  as  ofleo  as  ^M 

may  be  here,  in  tliis  life,  until  he  come  up  to  glory,  to  rest  with 
Giod ;  and  that  because  man  can  not  here  enjoy  his  days  of  glory, 
he  might  therefore  foretaste  them  in  days  of  grace ;  and  is  this 
the  requital,  and  all  the  thanks  he  hath  for  hb  heart-breaking 
love  ?  to  turn  back  sweet  presence  and  fellowship,  and  love  of 
God  in  them,  to  dispute  away  these  days  with  scorn  and  con- 
tempt,  to  smoke  ihem  away  with  profanenera  and  mad  mirtli,  to 
dream  them  away  with  vanity  ;  to  drink,  to  swear,  to  riot,  to  whore, 
to  sport,  to  play,  to  card,  to  dice,  to  put  on  their  best  apparel 
that  they  may  dishonor  God  with  greater  pomp  and  bravery,  to 
tu1k  of  the  world,  to  be  later  up  that  day  than  any  other  day  of 
the  week,  when  their  own  irons  are  in  the  fire,  andyet  to  sleep  ser- 
nion,  or  scorn  the  ministry,  if  it  comes  home  to  their  conscieaces ; 
to  tell  tales  and  break  jests  at  home,  or  (at  best)  lo  talk  of  for- 
eign or  domestic  news,  only  to  pass  away  ibe  time,  rather  than  to 
see  God  in  his  works,  and  warm  their  hearts  thereby ;  to  think 
God  hath  good  measure  given  him,  if  they  attend  on  him  in  the 
forenoon,  although  the  afternoon  be  given  to  the  devil,  or  sleep,  or 
vanity,  or  foolish  pastimes  ;  to  draw  near  to  God  in  iheir  bodies, 
when  their  thoughts,  and  hearts,  and  aSections  are  gone  a-hunl- 
ing  or  ravening  after  ihe  world  the  Lord  knows  where,  but  far 
enough  off  from  him  :  do  you  thus  requite  the  Lord  for  this  great 
lore,  O  foolish  people  and  unwise?  Do  you  thus  make  the  days 
of  your  rest  and  joy  the  days  of  the  Lord's  sorrow  and  trouble  ? 
Do  you  thus  weary  the- Lord  when  he  gives  rest  unto  you  ?  Was 
there  ever  such  mercy  shown,  or  can  there  be  ever  any  greater 
love  upon  earth,  than  for  the  Lord  lo  call  to  a  wicked,  sinful  crea- 
ture, which  deserves  lo  be  banished  forever  out  of  his  presence,  to 
come  unto  him,  enter  into  his  rest,  take  his  fill  of  love.and  re- 
fresh itself  in  his  bosom  in  a  special  manner  all  this  day  ?  And 
therefore  can  there  be  a  greater  sin  above  ground  committed  out 
of  hell  than  thus  to  sin  against  this  love  F  I  do  not  think  that 
the  single  breach  of  the  Sabbath  (as  to  sport  and  feast  inordi- 
nately) is  03  great  a  sin  as  to  murder  a  man,  (ufaich  some  have 
cost  out  lo  the  reproach  of  some  zealous  fur  Ihe  observation  of 
the  Sabbath  day,  truly  the  Lord  knows,)  for  I  believe  their  milk 
Bod  over,  if  thus  they  »aid ;  but  I  speak  of  the  Sabbath 
under  this  notion  and  reHjwct,  and  as  herein  God's  great  love 
appears  to  weary,  sinful,  i-estle.^s  man,  as  a  day  wherein  all 
the  treasures  of  his  roost  rich  and  precious  love  are  set  open  ;  and 
in  this  respect,  let  any  man  tell  me  what  greater  sin  he  can 


imagiiie  tlian  sins  n^inst  the  greatest  love.  The  same  sins 
which  are  eommitled  upon  oiher  dnjs  in  ihe  week  are  then  pro- 
voking sinsj  but  to  commit  [licse  sins  upoa  the  Sabhalli  day  is  to 
douhle  the  evil  of  them.  Drinking,  and  swearing,  and  rioting, 
and  vain  talking,  etc.,  are  sins  on  the  week  day,  hut  they  are 

n  but  single  sins ;  but  these  and  auch  like  sins  on  the  Sabbath 
day  are  double  sins,  because  they  are  now  not  only  sins  against 
Grod's  command,  but  also  against  God's  Subtialhs  loo,  which 
much  aggravates  them  ;  and  yet  men  mourn  not  for  [liese  sins^ 
hod  the  Lord  never  mode  knovrn  his  Sabbaths  to  his  churches 
and  people  in  these  days,  they  might  then  have  had  some  excuse 
for  their  sins ;  but  now  to  profane  them  since  God  hath  made 
them  known  to  us,  especially  the  English  nation  and  people  to 
do  it,  upon  whom  the  Lord  bath  shined  out  of  heaven  with  greater 
light  and  glory  in  this  point  of  (be  Sabballi,  above  any  other 
places  and  churches  in  the  world,  what  will  they  liave  to  say  for 
themselves?  with  what  fig  leaves  will  they  hide  this  nakedness 
before  the  tribunal  of  God  ? 

The  Lord  might  have  hid  his  Sabbaths  from  us,  and  gone  lo 
another  people  that  would  have  been  more  thankful  fur  them 
and  glad  of  them  than  we  have  been  ;  and  yet  he  hath  been  loth 
to  leave  us;  and  do  we  thus  requite  the  Lord?  Surely  he  hath 
no  need  of  the  best  of  us,orof  our  attendance  upon  him  upon  these 
days ;  it  is  only  his  pity,  which,  seeing  us  wearied  with  sorrows, 
and  wearying  ourselves  in  our  sins,  makes  him  call  us  back 
to  a  weekly  rest  in  his  bosom,  who  might  have  let  us  alone,  and 
tired  out  our  hearts  in  our  own  folly  and  madness  all  our  days ; 
and  do  we  thus  requite  the  Lord  ?  Certamly  the  time  will  come 
wherein  we  shall  think  (as  once  Jerusalem  did  in  the  days  of  her 
affliction)  of  all  our  pleasant  things  we  once  had  in  the  days  of 
our  prosperity ;  certainly  men  shall  one  day  muum  for  the  loss 
of  all  their  precious  time,  who  misspend  it  now,  and  (above  .all 
limes)  for  the  loss  of  their  precious  pleasant  Sabbath  seasons 
of  refreshing,  which  once  they  had  given  them  to  find  rest  and 
peace  in  ;  when  t)ie  smoke  of  their  tormenting,  everlasting  bum* 
ing  shall  ascend  forever  and  ever,  wherein  they  shall  have  no 
rest  day  nor  night ;  you  shall  remember  and  think  then,  with  tears 
trickhng  down  your  dry  cheeks,  of  the  Sabbaths,  the  pleasant 
Sabbaths  that  once  you  luid,  and  shall  never  see  one  of  those 
days  of  the  Son  of  man  more  ;  you  sliall  mourn  then  to  see  Abra- 
ham's bo»om  afar  ofi',  and  thousand  Uiousands  at  rest  in  it,  where 
you  also  might  have  been  as  well  as  they,  if  you  had  not  despised 
the  rest  ol'  God  here,  in  the  bosom  of  his  Sabbaths. 

You  shall  then  mourn,  and  wring  your  bands,  and  tear  your 





*  hair,  and  stamp,  aiiJ  grow  raad,  and  yet  weep  lo  think  that  if  you 
had  had  a  heart  lo  have  spent  that  very  time  of  the  Subboth  in 
seeking  God,  in  drawing  near  to  God,  iu  resting  in  God,  which 
you  dispend  in  Idle  talk  iind  idleness,  in  rioting  luid  wantoU' 
ness,  in  sports  and  foolii'lineris,  upon  tliia  day.  you  bad  then  been 
in  God'a  eternal  rest  in  heaven,  and  forever  blessed  in  God. 
It  is  said  Jerusalem  remembered,  in  ihe  day  of  her  affliction,  all 
her  pleasant  things  when  the  enemy  did  mock  at  her  Sabbaths; 
and  so  will  you  remember,  wiili  sad  hearts,  the  loss  of  all  your 
precious  bpo^ds  of  grace,  «speci)tlly' then,  when  the  dcvihi,  and 
heathens,  and  damned  outcasts,  who  never  had  the  mercy  to 
enjoy  tbem,  shall  mock  at  Ihee  for  the  loss  of  thy  Sabbaths. 
Verily  I  can  not  think  that  any  men  that  ever  tasted  any  sweet- 
ness in  Christ  or  his  Sabbath,  and  felt  the  unknown  refieshinga 
of  this  sweet  rest,  but  that  they  will  mourn  for  their  cold  afieo- 
tions  to  them  and  unfruitful  spending  of  them,  before  they  die; 
otherwise  never  go  about  to  blear  men's  eyes  with  discourse,  and 
invectives,  and  dbputes  against  them,  or  with  comol  excuses 
for  your  licentious  spending  of  them  ;  for  doubtless  you  taste 
not,  and  therefore  know  not  what  they  are,  and  you  will  one  day 
be  found  to  be  such  as  speak  evil  of  the  things  you  know  not. 
Hear,  ye  despisers,  and  wonder,  and  perish :  is  the'  infinil« 
majesty  and  glory  of  God  so  vile  in  your  eyes  that  you  do  not 
think  him  worthy  of  special  attendance  one  day  in  a  week?  Doth 
>ie  call  you  now  to  rest  in  his  bosom,  and  will  you  now  kick  his 
bowels,  despise  this  love,  and  spit  in  his  face  ?  Doth  he  c&il  upon 
you  to  spend  this  day  in  holiness,  and  will  you  spend  it  in  mirth, 
and  sports,  and  pnslimes,  and  in  all  manner  of  liccntiousneu  ? 
Hast  Iliou  wearied  God  with  thine  iniquities,  and  thjself  in  thine 
iniquities  all  the  week  long,  (for  which  God  might  justly  cut 
thee  off  from  seeing  any  more  Sabbath,)  and  doth  the  Lord 
Jesus  (instead  of  recompensing  thee  thus)  call  you  back  again  lo 
jrour  resting-place?  and  will  you  now  weary  the  Lord  again, 
that  he  ran  not  have  rest  or  quiet  for  you  one  day  in  a  week  ? 

O  that  we  could  mourn  for  tliese  things !  and  yet  walk  abroad 
the  face  of  the  whole  earth  at  this  day,  and  then  say  where  shall 
you  find  almost  God's  Sabbaths  exactly  kept ;  viz.,  with  meet 
preparation  for  them,  delight  in  them,  with  wonderment  and 
thankfulness  to  God  after  the  enjoyment  of  tbem.  Alt  tho 
world  knows  lo  wliom  the  barbarous  Turks  do  dedicate  their  Fri- 
days; the  Jews  also,  how  they  sanctify  their  Saturdays,  to  the 
Lord  Jehovah  indeed,  but  not  unto  the  Lord  iheir  God.  What 
account  the  Papists  put  upon  the  Sabbaths,  not  only  their  writ- 
ings, which  level  it  with  nil  other  holy  days,  hut  also  their  looss 




practice  in  eporU  and  revelings  upon  this  day,  bear  sufficieot 
witness  ;  and  0  that  we  had  no  cause  to  wa-^h  off  this  spot  with 
our  tears  from  the  beautiful  and  pleusani  t'nce  of  the  glorioiu 
grace  and  peace,  which  ODce  shined  in  the  German  churches,  by' 
whose  graces  we  may  stand  weeping,  and  say.  This  is  your  miser/ 
for  this  your  provoking  sin  !  Scotland  knows  best  her  own  in- 
tegrity, whose  lights  have  been  hurning  and  shining  long  in  their 
clearness  in  this  particular;  hut  England  haih  had  the  name, 
and  worn  ihis  garland  of  glory,  wherewith  the  Lord  balli  crowned 
it  above  all  other  churches.  But  how  halh  that  little  Rock  of 
slaughter,  which  hath  wept  for  il,  and  preached,  and  printed,  and 
done  and  suifered  for  it,  been  haled  and  persecuted  !  Who  have 
been  the  scorn,  and  shame,  and  reproach  of  men,  but  a  company 
of  poor  weaklings,  for  going  out  a  few  miles  to  hear  a  faithful, 
painful  preai-her,  from  those  idle  sheplierdei,  who  either  could 
not  feed  them  with  knowledge  and  understanding  at  bomei' 
or  else  would  not  do  it  through  gross  profaueness,  or  exIremS 
idleness  ?  .  _^ 

And  now,  sinc^Gud  hath  broken  the  yoke  of  their  oppressoran 
and  set  his  people  at  liberty  to  return  to  Sion  and  her  solemn  I 
assemblies,  as  in  days  of  olilf  and  hath  given  to  them  the  desires  I 
of  their  hearts,  that  they  may  now  be  as  holy  on  tbe  Sab^ 
bath  as  they  will,  without  any  to  reproach  them,  at  least  to  coun- 
tenance such  reproaches  of  them  ;  now,  I  say,  when  one  wouM 
_think  the  precious  Sabbaths,  (which  so  many  of  God's  servants 
in  former  time  have  brought  down  to  tiiis  generation,  swimming 
in  their  tears  and  prayers,  and  which  many  in  these  days  have 
so  much  looked  and  longed  fur,)  that  every  eye  should  be  look- 
ing up  to  heaven  with  tliankfulncss  for  these,  and  that  every 
heart  should  embrace  God's  Sabbaths  with  tears  of  joyfulness, 
and  bid  this  dear  and  precious  friend  welcome,  and  lie  and  rest  in 
their  bosom  i  and  so  I  doubt  not  but  that  England  hath  yet 
many  a  corner  full  of  such  precious  jewels,  to  whom  God's  Sab- 
baths are  yet  most  precious  and  glorious,  and  who  can  not  easily 
forget  such  blessed  seasons  and  means  in  them,  whereby  (if  ever 
the  Lord  did  good  udio  them)  they  have  been  so  oft  refreshed, 
and  wherein  ihey  have  so  otl  seen  God,  wherein  they  so  of^  met 
with  him,  and  he  with  them :  but  whose  heart  will  it  not  make 
to  relent  and  sigh,  to  hear  of  late  a  company,  not  of  ignorant 
debauched  persons,  molignants,  prelatical,  and  corrupt  and  camid 
men,  but  of  such  who  have  many  of  them  in  former  limes  given 
great  hopes  of  some  fear  of  God,  and  much  love  to  God's  ordi- 
nances and  Sabbaths  ?  and  now  (what  hurt  tbe  Sabbath's  ordi- 
iiaacei  of  tba  Lord  Jesus  therein  have  done  them,  I  know  nut, 
38  • 




but)  il  would  break  one's  henrl  lo  see  whnt  little  cure  there  is  la 
sanctify  the  Snbbath,  even  by  lliem  who  think  in  Ibeir  judgments 
that  tlie  day  is  of  Gud.  What  poor  preparation  tor  it,  either  in 
themKelTes  or  families !  what  little  cure  to  profit  by  it,  or  10 
instruel  or  catechize  their  families,  and  to  bring  them  also  in  love 
with  it !  what  secret  wearinei^  and  deadheartedneBS  (almost  whol- 
ly unlaiuented)  remain  upon  them !  what  earthly  thoughts,  what 
liberty  in  speech  about  any  worldly  matter,  presently  after  the 
most  warning  sermon  is  done !  that  the  Lord  Jesue  hath  scarce 
good  carcasses  and  outsidea  brought  him,  which  can  not  but 
threaten  more  crows  lo  pick  litem  unless  they  repent ;  and  yet 
this  \e  not  so  sad  ns  to  see  the  looseneaa  of  men's  judgments  ia 
this  point  of  the  Sabbath,  whereby  some  think  a  Sabbath  lawful, 
but  not  necesdRry,  (in  re.Hpect  uf  any  command  of  God ;)  nayi 
Bome  think  it  superstition  to  observe  a  weekly  Subbalh,  which 
should  be  every  day,  (as  they  imagine :)  they  have  allegorized 
God's  Sabbaths  and  almost  all  God's  ordinances  out  of  the  world, 
imd  cast  such  pretended  an tt- Christian  tilth  and  pollution  upon 
Ihem,  that  spiritual  men  must  not  now  meddle  with  them ;  nay, 
verily,  all  duties  of  the  moral  law,  and  fruitful  obedience,  and 
holy  walking,  and  sancliH cation,  graces,  and  humiliation,  and 
such  like,  are  the  eecret  contempt  of  many,  and  the  l>ase  drudg- 
ery for  a  mill  horse  nnd  legal  Cbriatian,  rather  than  for  one  that 
ij  of  on  evangelical  frame  ;  and  herein  Satan  now  appears  wiih 
the  ball  at  his  foot,  and  seems  to  threaten  in  time  to  cari^  all 
before  him,  and  lo  kick  and  carry  God'a  precious  Sabbaths  out 
of  the  world  with  him ;  and  then  farewell  dear  Lord  Jesos,  with 
ail  tby  Bweet  love  and  life,  if  Sabbaths  be  once  taken  from  us 
by  the  blind  and  bold  di^pulings  of  wretched  men:  auihority 
03  vet  upholds  them,  (which  is  no  small  mercy,)  and  the  favor 
of  Clirtst's  sweetness  in  them,  and  the  external  brightness  of  the 
Iieauty  of  them,  do  still  remain  on  many,  with  that  strength  nnd 
glory  that  it  is  not  good  policy  for  the  prince  of  darkness  now 
to  employ  all  his  forces  against  ihe  gates  of  the  Sabbath;  but 
the  time  haaiens  wherein  the  assault  will  he  great  and  Ueree,  and 
I  much  fear  that  for  tlie  secret  contempt  of  these  things,  the 
Lord,  in  dreadful  justice,  will  strengthen  delusions  about  ibis  day 
to  break  forlh  and  prosper;  and  then  pray,  you  poor  saints  of 
God  and  hidden  ones,  that  "your  Highi  may  not  be  in  the  winter, 
nor  on  the  Sabbath  day ;"  but  "  woe  then  to  them  that  give  suck," 
woe  then  to  the  high  ministry  that  should  have  kept  these  galea, 
woe  Chen  lo  tliat  loose  and  wanton  generation  rising  up,  who  think 
such  outward  tbrms  and  observation  of  days  to  be  too  coarse  und 
loo  hiw  and  mean  a  work  tor  tbeir  ennobled  spirita,  which  are 




now  raised  higher  and  nearer  God  than  to  look  much  after  Sab-  ' 
baths  or  ordinances,  gracea  or  duties,  or  any  such  outward  forma; 
for  I  doubt  not,  but  if,  alter  all  the  light  and  glory  shining  in 
England  conc-erning  God'a  Sabbaths,  if  yet  ihey  are  not  thereby 
become  precious,  but  that  tbe  Lord  will  make  them  bo  by  his 
plagues,  if  ihia  sin  once  get  head,  God  will  burn  up  the  whole 
world,  and  make  himself  dreadful  to  all  flesh,  until  lie  hath  made 
unto  himself  a  holy  people,  and  a  humble  people,  that  shall  "  love 
the  dusi,  and  take  pleasure  in  the  very  slones  of  his"  house,  and 
love  the  "  place  where  his  honor  dwells,"  and  long  for  the  time 
wherein  his  presence  and  blessing  shall  appear  and  be  poured 
out  upon  the  Sabbath  day. 

It  is  matter  of  the  greatest  mourning,  that  they,  above  all  othera,  I 
should  trouble  God's  rest,  wherein  perhaps  their  miuIs  huve  found 
so  much  rest,  or  might  have  done ;  that  in  these  limes,  wherein 
the  Lord  Jesus  was  coming  out  to  give  unto  his  house  his  ordi- 
nances, and  unto  his  people  his  Sabbaths  and  days  of  rest  every 
way.  that  now  they,  atiove  all  others,  should  ofler  to  pull  them 
out  of  his  hand,  tread  them  under  foot,  and  hereby  teach  oil  the 
profane  rout  in  tlie  world  to  do  the  like,  with  a  quiet  conscience 
and  without  any  check  by  their  reasonings  ;  that  now  when  God 
09  wasting  the  load,  and  burning  down  its  glory,  for  the  sius 
gainst  his  Sabbaths,  that  just  at  tliis  time,  more  than  ever,  they 
should  rise  up  to  pollute  and  profane  this  day.  Tlie  Lord  grant 
his  poor  people  to  see  cause  at  last  to  mourn  for  this  sin,  that  the 
rest  of  the  Sabbath  may  be  rest  to  their  souls,  especially  in  ihia 
weary  hour  of  temptation, '  which  is  shaking  all  things,  and 
threatens  yet  greater  troubles  unto  all  flesh.  The  Lord  JesDa 
certainly  hath  great  blessings  in  his  hand  to  pour  out  upon  hia 
people,  in  giving  them  better  days,  and  brighter  and  more  beau- 
tiful Sabbaths,  and  glorious  appearances ;  but  1  fear,  and  there- 
fore J  desire  that  this  unwise  and  unthankful  generation  may  not 
stand  in  their  own  way,  lest  the  Lord  make  quick  work,  and  give 
those  things  to  a  remnant  to  enjoy,  wliich  others  had  no  hearts  to 














Matt.  xi.  29.  •■-  **  Take  mr  yoke  apon  you,  and  learn  of  me ; 
for  I  am  meek  and  lowly  in  heart :  and  ye  ahall  find  rest 
unto  your  •onla/* 


One  of  the  sweetest  refreshing  mercies  of  Qod,  to  his  "Sew 
England  people,  amidst  all  their  wilderness  trials,  and  straits 
and  sorrows,  wherewith  they  at  first  conflicted  in  those  ends  of 
the  earth,  hath  been  their  sanctuary  enjoyments,  in  the  beauties 
of  holiness,  where  they  have  seen  and  met  with  Him  whom  their 
souls  love,  and  had  familiar  and  full  converse  with  him,  above 
what  they  could  then  enjoy  in  the  land  from  whence  they  came. 
This  is  that  that  hath  sweetened  many  a  bitter  cup  to  the  remnant 
of  Israel.     The  Lord  alone  led  him,  and  there  was  no  strange 
God  with  him,  was  said  concerning  Israel  of  old ;  and  this  was 
accounted  mercy  enough  when  he  led  them  into  a  land  where  no 
jnan  dwelt,  and  which  no  man  passed  through.    What  Grod  hath 
done  for  New  England  in  this  respect,  and  what  their  sanctuary 
mercies  be,  thou  hath  here  a  taste,  though  but  a  taste.    Thesei 
notes  may  well  be  thought  to  be  less  accurate  than  if  the  author  I 
himself  had  published  them,  and  to  want  some  polishments  and  I 
trimmings,  which  it  were  not  fit  for  any  other  to  add ;  however,  I 
thou  wilt  find  them  full  of  useful  truths,  and  mayest  easily  I 
discern  his  spirit,  and  a  spirit  above  his  own  breathing  in  theinul 

Concerning  the  author,  it  were  worth  the  while  to  write  the 
story  of  his  life. 

It  is  needless  to  speak  in  his  commendation  ;  his  works  p 
him  in  the  gates.  They  that  know  him  know  he  had  as  real  ap^ 
prehensions  of  the  things  of  Grod,  and  lived  as  much  with  GM, 
and  with  his  own  heart,  and  more  than  the  most  of  Christians 
do.  lie  had  his  education  at  Immanuel  College  in  Cambridge. 
The  conversion  and  change  of  his  heart  was  wrought  betimes 





when  he  lived  in  ibe  university,  and  enjoyed  Dr.  -  Preston's 
ministrj',  whereby  God  hitd  the  very  best  and  strength  of  his  part 
nnd  yenra  for  himseir.  ^Vhen  he  vros  Jirgt  awakened  to  look 
after  religion,  having  before  sworn  quietly  in  ihe  stream  of  the 
times,  he  was  utterly  at  a  loss  which  way  lo  take,  being  much 
molested  with  suggestions  of  atheism,  (in  the  depths  whereof 
Junius  was  quite  lost  for  a  time,)  and  moved  and  templed  lo  the 
ways  of  Fumilism  also ;  for  some  advised  him  in  this  condition 
to  go  to  Grindleston  and  to  hear  Mr.  Brierley,  and  being  in- 
formed that  the  people  were  wont  to  find  a  mighty  possessing 
overpowering  presence  and  work  of  the  Spirit  when  ihey  heard 
him,  he  resolved  upon  the  journey ;  but  God  in  mercy  diverted 

. ha vigE  reserved  him  for  .tetter  things.     Yet  he  read  what 

they^aid,  turn  Ihe  books  of  liTli.  amongst  the  rest,  where  meet- 
ing with  this  passage,  ''  Tiiat  a  Christian  is  so  swallowed  up  in 
the  spirit,  that  what  action  soever  the  spirit  moves  him  to,  sup- 
pose whoredom,  he  may  do  it,  and  it  is  no  sin  to  him ; "  this  was 
enough  ;  for  being  against  the  light  of  his  natural  conscience,  it 
bred  in  him  an  utter  abhorrency  of  those  loose  and  vile  ways  and 
1  principles  ever  after.  This  advantage  also  he  had,  that  Dr.  Tuck- 
TlSy  was  then  his  tutor,  whom  he  acquainted  with  his  condition, 
and  liad  Ins  direction  and  help  in  those  miserable  fluctuations 
and  straits  of  his  soul.  Happy  is  the  man  whose  doubtings 
end  in  establishments ;  nil  lam  cerium,  qtidin  quod  de  dubio  eer- 
tum ;  but  when  men  arrive  in  scepticism,  as  the  last  issue  and 
result  ol'  all  their  debates  and  thoughts  of  heart  about  religion, 
it  had  been  good  for  such  if  they  had  never  been  bom. 

After  his  heart  was  changed,  it  was  observed  of  him,  that  his 
abililies  of  mind  were  also  much  enlarged,  divinity,  though  it  be 
chiefly  [lie  art  and  rule  of  the  will,  yet  raising  and  perfectjug 
the  understanding  also ;  which  I  conceive  came  to  pass  chielty 
by  this  means,  that  the  fear  of  God  fixed  him,  and  made  him 
serious,  and  taught  him  to  mcditalc,  which  is  the  main  improve- 
Imcnt  of  the  understanding.  Thereforefsuch  as  came  to  him 
'for  direction  about  their  studies,  he  would  often  advise  them  to 
be  much  in  meditation,  professing  that,  having  spent  some  time 



.u  meditation  every  day  in  hia  beginning  limca,  and  writiei). 
down  hid  ilioughts,  he  saw  cause  now  to  blesa  God  for  it.  Ile[ 
was  assigned  to.  the  work  of  the  ministry,  at  a  solemn  meeting 
knd  conference  of  sundry  godly  ministers  about  it;  there  were  to 
the  number  of  tweUe  present  at  the  meeting,  whose  solemn  ad- 
Tice  WAR.  Itiat  he  should  serve  the  I.ord  in  the  gospel  of  his 
8on;  wherein  (li«y  liare  been  the  salvation  of  many  a  eoal; 
ftr  Upon  lhi«  he  addressed  himself  to  the  work  with  that  reality 
and  seriousness  in  wooing  and  winning  souls,  that  his  words 
'  made  deep  impressions,  and  seldom  or  never  fell  to  the  ground. 

lie  was  lecturer  a  while  at  Earlescolne,  in  Essex,  (which,  I 
lake  it,  was  the  first  place  of  his  ministry,)  where  he  did  much 
px>d,  and  the  people  there,  though  now  it  is  long  since,  and 
many  are  gone,  yet  they  have  a  very  precious  and  deep  remem- 
brance of  him,  of  the  mighty  power  of  God  by  him  to  this  day. 
But  W,  Laud,  then  Ili.'hop  of  London,  soon  stopped  his  mouth, 
and  drove  him  away,  as  he  did  many  other  godly  ministers  from 
Essex  at  the  same  time.  AAer  this  he  lived  at  Bulterchrome, 
in  Yorkshire,  at  Sir  Richard  Darley's  house,  till  the  iniquity  of 
those  times  hunted  him  thence  also.  Then  lie  went  to  North- 
Ufflberland,  till  eilenct^d  lliere  also ;  and  being  thus  molested 
■ad  chased  up  and  down  at  home,  he  fled  to  New  England,  and 
after  some  difliculties  and  delays,  by  great  storms  and  disDsiert 
U  aea  upon  the  sands  and  coasts  of  Yarmouth,  which  retarded 
his  voyage  till  another  year,  he  errived  there  at  lajt,  where  ho 
wiu  jwsiur  lo  a  precious  flock  at  Cambridge  about  fourteen 
years.  lie  was  but  forty-six  or  forty-seven  years  old  when  he 
died.  His  sickness  began  with  a  sore  throat,  and  then  a  ()uin- 
sy,  and  then  a  fever,  whereof  he  died  August  2oth,  lfi<|)- 
This  was  one  tiling  he  said  upon  his  death  bed :  "  Lord,  t  am  1 
vile,  but  ihou  art  ^righteous."  And  to  those  that  were  about  I 
him,  ho  bade  tliem  love  Jesus  Christ  dearly ;  "  that  little  part 
that  !  have  in  him  is  nu  small  comfort  to  me  now." 

His  manner  of  preaching  was  close  and  searching,  and 
abundance  of  affection  and  compassion  to  hia  hearers.     He  look 
great  pains  in  hie  preparations  for  his  public  labors,  accounting 
VOL.   III.  21 

part    I 

t»k  I  J 



»78  TU    THE    RLADEK. 

it  a  cuwed  ihing  lo  do  llie  work  of  ibe  Lord  negligently ; 
therefore  spending  usually  two  or  three  whole  days  in  preparing 

.  for  the  work  of  the  Subbaih,  had  his  sermons  finished  Uaually  on 

I  Saturday  by  two  of  the  clock.  He  hath  soraelitnes  expressed 
himself  thus  in  public :  "  God  will  curse  that  man's  lalwrs  that 
lumbers  up  and  down  in  Ihe  world  all  the  week,  and  then  upon 
Saturday  in  the  anemoon  goes  to  liis  study,  whenas  God  knows 

p^llP'  '''"'^  were  little  enough  to  pray  and  weep  in,  and  to  get  his 

I  heart  in  frame,  etc."  He  attecled  plainness  together  with  power 
in  preaching,  not  seeking  abstrusities,  nor  liking  to  hover  and 
Boar  aloft  in  dark  expressions,  and  so  shoot  his  arrows  (as  manj 

Iprcacliers  do)  over  the  heads  of  his  hearers. 
fl^^lt  is  a  wretched  stumbling  block  to  some,  that  his  sermons  are 

1  somewhat  strict,  nni,_(asjhey^_leEm^it)  legal;  some  souls  can 
relish  none  but  meal-mouthed  preachers,  wTiocome  with  soft,  and 
smooth,  and  toothless  words,  h/aina  verba  byuini$  virit  ;  but 
these  limes  need  humbling  ministries,  and  blessed  be  God  that 
there  are  any ;  for  where  (here  are  no  law  sermons,  there  will  be 
few  gospel  lives,  and  were  (here  more  law  preaching  in  England 
by  the  nien  of  gifts,  tliei'o  would  be  more  gospel  walking  both  by 

^Ibemselvea  and  the  people.  To  preach  the  law,  not  in  a  forced, 
affected  manner,  but  wisely  and  powerfully,  together  with  the 
gospel,  as  Christ  himself  was  wont  lo  do,  (Matt.  v.  and  elsewhere,) 
is  tlie  way  to  carry  on  all  three  together  —  sense  of  misery, 
the  application  of  llie  remedy,  and  the  returns  of  thankfulness 
and  duty.  Nor  is  any  doctrine  more  comfortiog  than  this  bum- 
bling way  of  God,  if  rightly  managed. 

It  is  certain  the  foundations  of  aiWr  sorrows  and  ruins  to  tlie 
church  have  ever  been  laid  in  the  daj's  of  her  prosperity,  and 
peace,  and  rest,  when  she  enjoys  all  her  pleasant  things.  Tliis 
the  watchmen  of  Israel  should  foresee ;  and  therefore  what  should 
they  do  but  seek  to  humble,  and  awaken,  and  search,  and  melt 
men's  hearts,  and  warn  every  one  night  and  day  with  tears,  that, 
in  the  day  of  their  peace,  they  may  not  sin  away  the  things  of 
their  peace.  There  are  Iberefuie  three  requests,  which  wo 
ith  bended  knee*  for  England,  to 

luld  des 

?  lo  bi-g  of  Goi 

cords  of  I 
allh,  thSr' 


peq)Ctuale  tlie  present  prosperity  and  peace  thereof;  and  let  us 
commend  tbem  to  the  mourning  nnd  praying  ones  amongst  us,  tliat 
iliey  would  be  thn  Lord'a  remembrancers  in  ibese  petitions  :  — 

1 .  A  right  understanding  and  sober  use  of  liberty.  For  when 
people  come  first  out  of  bondage,  they  are  apt  to  be  not  only 
somewhat  fond  of  their  liberties,  but  to  wax  giddy  and  wanloo 
with  liberty,  and  instead  of  shaking  off  the  bloody  yokes  of  men, 
to  cast  off,  at  least  in  part,  the  government  and  blessed  yoke  of 
Christ  also,  tience  it  comes  about  that  a  day  of  rest  from  per- 
secution, which  should  be  a  day  of  liberty  to  the  saints  lo  serve 
,  God,  may  become  a  day  of  great  seduction,  and  of  liberty  to  se- 
ducing spirits  to  deceive,  and  damn,  and  mislead  them  fi-om  the 
truths  and  ways  of  God.  But  the  machinations  of  men,  though 
in  coojuDction  with  the  powers  and  gates  of  hell,  shall  certainly 
full  at  last  before  truth  and  prayer.  And  of  this  b  the  first 
treatise  which  is  seasonably  published. 

To  be  fast  bound  lo  the  rule  gjth  all  the  bonds  and  cords 
God  and  man  is  the  perfection  of  liberty.  Hence  there 
surer  comer  stone  of  ruin  to  a  Oiristian  commonwealth, 
God  will  break  them  with  unparalleled  destructions  by  some 
overflowing  scourge,  when  the  day  of  vengeance  is  in  his  heart, 
than  lo  think  that  religion  is  none  of  their  liberties;  and  yet  how 
many  sons  of  Belial  are  there  void  of  counsel  I  neither  is  there 
any  understanding  in  them  who  imagine  vain  things,  and  say, ''  Let 
us  break  his  bands  asunder,  and  cast  away  his  cords  from  us." 
How  do  men  run  into  extremes,  either  stretching  and  paring 
every  one  to  the  giant's  bed,  and  thereby  denying  liberty  to  the 
saints  to  serve  hiro,  according  to  the  measure  of  their  stature  ia 
Christ,  or  else,  on  the  other  hand,  opening  the  door  so  wide  as  to 
plead  for  liberty  to  all  the  disguised  enemies  and  sins  against 
Christ,  thereby,  instead  of  uniting  the  saints  in  one,  endeavoring 

I  through  a  dreadful  mistake,  lo  unite  Christ  and  Belial  I     It  is  a 
sad  thing  when  a  man  is  come  to  this  puss,  that  he  is  not 
to  resolve  his  conscience  whether  Baal  be  God,  or  the  Lord  b« 
God,  and  therefore  would  not  have  the  worshipers  of  Baal  pun- 


TO   THt  KK 

indifterency  and  Irresolution  of  spirit  in  Ibe  things  of  God  ? 
to  the  valley  of  vision,  even  f  o  a  sinful  nation  laden  with  iniquity, 
nnd  led  away  from  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus,  and  to  the  host  of 
the  high  ones  that  sit  on  high,  in  the  day  of  his  visitation,  if  ihia 
be  the  npirit  of  these  times ;  for  in  the  day  when  he  visits,  God 
will  visit  for  these  things. 

2.  Tliat  his  word,  especially  the  word  of  his  gospel,  may  be 
precious  and  powerful,  may  run  and  be  glorified  in  England. 
Alas !  m  there  ia  much  preaching,  but  few  serious,  few  heart- 
breaking sermons,  so  there  is  much  hearing,  but  little  effectual 
bearing.  Men  stand  like  the  oaks  of  Bashan  before  the  words 
of  the  God  of  Israel ;  no  ten'or  of  the  Lord,  no  news  of  ever- 
lasting destruction,  no  evidence  of  the  fierce  anger  of  God  upon 
them,  which  bums  down  to  the  bottom  of  hell,  can  take  hold  upon 
their  spirits,  or  awaken  their  consciences,  to  make  inquiries  after 
God  in  this  their  day ;  yea,  if  the  bars  of  the  pit  of  hell  were 
broken,  and  if  the  devils  of  hell  should  come  flying  up  amongst 
lu,  in  our  solemn  assemblies,  from  the  fiery  comers  of  the  pit 
below,  with  everlasting  burnings  about  their  ears,  and  with  chains 
of  darkness  rattling  at  their  heeU,  they  might  fright  men  out  of 
their  wits,  )>erhaps,  or  from  the  acts  of  sin,  it  may  be,  for  a  time, 
hut  it  would  not  work  upon  their  hearts,  their  desperate,  dead, 
besotted  hearts.  The  fools  in  Israel  will  have  their  swing  in 
their  lusts,  and  go  lo  hell  in  a  full  career,  let  God  do  his  best. 
O,  the  hardness  of  men's  hearts !  And  the  main  reason  of  it  is, 
because  they  hear  but  a  sound  of  words,  but  ihey  do  not  hear  the 
Idrd  in  tiiat  word ;  they  hear  words  that  are  spoken  by  God, 
but  they  hear  not,  they  see  not,  God  himself  therein.  If  ever 
thou  wouldest  profit  by  reading  or  hearing,  take  every  word  as  K 
special  message  to  thee  from  God  ;  and  of  this  fruitless  hearing, 
and  the  rules  of  hearing  aright,  is  the  other  treatise. 

3.  Conscience  of  hid  Sabbaths.     Of  which  there  is  an  elaborate 
this  author,  formerly  published  by  himself;  there- 
fore we  shall  add  no  more.     The  blessing  of  Heaven  go  with 
these,  to  make  us  a  willing  people  in  the  day  of  his  power,  lo 
Hibmit  lo  his  word,  and  to  come  under  the  wing  of  the  govern- 

TO  THE  RRADER.  281 

ment  of  Jesus  Christ,  as  esteeming  these  spiritual  mercies  our 
best  mercies,  our  choicest  and  dearest  liberties.  If  ever  the  Lord 
Jesus  (which  mercy  forbid)  should  take  his  doleful  and  final  fare- 
well of  the  English  nation,  as  when  he  laid  the  tombstone  upon 
Jerusalem,  such  as  these  will  be  his  mournings  over  us:  *'0 
Jerusalem  I  Jerusalem  I  thou  that  Idllest  the  prophets  and  bumest 
them  that  are  sent  unto  thee,"  as  they  did  in  the  time  of  Popery, 
^  how  often  would  I  have  gathered  thy  children  together,**  (by  my 
word  and  spirit  therein,)  *^  even  as  a  hen  gathereth  her  chickens 
under  the  wings'*  (of  my  special  govemment  and  protection,)  ^  but 
ya  would  not ;  behold,  your  house  is  left  unto  you  desolate."  But 
the  Lord,  who  doth  not  only  make  the  day  dark  with  night,  but 
also  tumeth  the  shadow  of  death  into  the  morning,  even  the  Lord 
avert  these  evils^  and  the  Lord  make  the  English  nation  his 
Hephsibah,  and  the  land  Beulah,  which  is  the  prayer  of  hla 
mourners  in  Sion,  and  of 

Thy  servants  in  Jesus,  and  for  Jesus'  sake, ' 

William  Grsbkhill, 

SiLMUBL  Mather. 



The  precious  memory  of  the  author  of  these  ensuing  sermona 
needs  no  reviving  to  any  graeioua  heart  that  had  any  knowledge 
of  liim.  Yea,  the  world  knows  in  part,  (though  hut  in  a  little 
port,)  by  some  pieced  of  hie  formerly  printed,  (while  lie  was  yet 
wilh  us,)  wbo  iliia  author  was,  what  it  owes  to  God  for  biin,  and 
how  justly  it  might  sigh  over  bis  grave,  with  that  of  the  apostle, 
"  Of  whom  the  world  waa  not  worthy ! "  His  praise  throughout 
all  the  cliurchca  is  far  above  any  addition  by  eo  mean  a  pen  as 
writes  these  lines.  But  it  is  not  lit  that  the  first  page  of  any 
thing  published  after  his  death  (for  I  doubt  not  but  his  ileath  is 
long  ago  publiL-ly  took  notice  of)  should  go  without  some  witness 
of  a  mournful  remembrance  thereof,  which,  indeed,  no  tears  ran 
j  Bufiiciently  lament.  We  who  sometimes  sat  under  his  shadow, 
and  were  fed  from  G!od  by  him,  (the  poor  flock  of  this  shepherd,) 
among  whom  he  lived,  "  testifying  repentance  toward  God,  and 

I  faith  toward  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ; "  and  whom  ho  sometimes 
"  exhorted,  comforted,  and  charg;cd  every  one  of  us  as  a  father 
doth  his  children  ;  "  we  can  not  but  carry  sorrow  in  the  bottom  of 
lour  hearts  to  this  day,  that  we  must  here  see  his  face  no  more, 
"Neither  do  we  believe  that  his  loss  remains  with  us  alone,  or  only 
within  the  limits  of  this  remote  wilderness ;  the  benefit  (and 
consequently  the  want)  of  such  a  burning  and  shining  light  is 
of  more  general  concernment  than  we  easily  apprehend,  espe- 
cially in  this  age,  wherein  not  only  many  sit  in  utter  darkness, 
but,  which  is  more,  the  new  light  thereof  is  darkness,  and  tha 


love  of  many  waxing  cold.  But  we  must  adl  be  silent  before 
Him  whose  judgments  are  unsearchable.  Neither  maj  we  pre- 
sume to  saj  to  him,  What  doest  thou  ? 

It  is  instantly,  and  not  without  cause,  desired  by  many  that 
such  relics  of  his  labors  as  do  survive  him  may  be  (at  least 
some  of  them)  imparted  to  the  public  To  effect  any  thing  con- 
siderable that  way  is  not  an  easy  or  sudden  work.  But  this 
small  piece  being  at  present  attained,  it  seemed  not  amiss  to  let 
it  pass  the  press.  These  were  some  of  his  lecture  sermons,  1 
preached,  most  of  them,  in  the  year  1 641.  They  are  now  tran-  I 
scribed  by  a  godly  brother,  partly  from  the  author's  own  notes,  I 
partly  from  what  he  took  from  his  mouth.  The  subject  (in 
both  the  texts)  is  of  great  use,  and  needful  for  these  times, 
wherein  there  is  more  liberty  than  good  use  of  it,  and  much  more 
common  and  outwaird  than  saving  and  effectual  knowledge  of  the 
word  of  Grod.  These  posthumous  editions  are  far  short  of  what 
the  author  was  wont  to  do,  and  of  what  the  sermons  were  in 
preaching.  But  though  the  sense  be  not  every  where  so  full,  nor 
every  thing  so  thoroughly  spoken  to,  nor  the  style  so  good  by  far 
as  the  author's  manner  was,  yet  the  intelligent  reader  will  find 
a  precious  treasure  of  truth  in  it,  not  fit  to  be  buried  or  neglected. 
The  prophets  do  not  live  forever,  but  their  words  do.  The  Lord 
make  them  such  ever-living  words  as  may  take  hold  of  all  onr 
hearts,  not  for  judgment,  but  for  mercy ;  for  one  of  these  waji 
they  shall  live,  yea,  rise  up  at  the  last  day. 

March  29,  1652.  ' 




1  Chron.  xiL  8,  "  NeTerthelesa  ther  shall  be  his  le 

know  hi;  Mtrvicc,  and  ihc  service  of  the  kingdan 

rants,  that  thej  mt 
I  or  the  cooMiy." 

The  greatest  part  of  this  chapter  is  spent  in  setting  down 
that  fumoua  war  which  Shi^hak,  king  of  ^gypt,  mode  against 
Behoboam,  king  of  Judah. 

The  cause  of  this  war  in  regard  of  Shisbak  is  not  set  down  ; 
probable  conjecturea  there  be :  Jeroboam  probably  might  be 
treacherous,  who  having  a  party  in  Hgypt,  lest  Kehoboam  shonld 
grow  loo  great,  together  with  some  other  pretended  nronga, 
might  awaken  this  bear  from  bia  den ;  but  in  regard  of  God, 
you  may  Bee  the  reason  set  down,  (ver.  2,)  "  because  tbey  had 
transgressed  against  the  Lord." 

The  time  of  this  war  is  set  down  in  the  Grsl  Terse  —  when  ha 
bad  established  the  kingdom  by  wholesome  laws,  erecting  God's 
worship,  and  countenancing  godly  men,  (3  Chron.  xi.  IG,  17,) 
which  continued  three  years,  and  strengthened  himself  by  forti- 
fied places,  and  munition  lit  for  war,  as  in  the  foregoing  cbapMr 
appears.  Now,  when  he  had  most  peace  and  quiet,  he  and  all 
Israel  suddenly  forsake  the  Lord,  which  was  the  fourth  year ; 
and  in  the  filVh  year  comes  Shishak,  and  with  a  mighty  host 
wastes  all  before  him  until  he  comes  to  the  chief  city. 

Now,  in  verse  the  fifth  and  sixth  is  set  down  the  repentance  of 
the  people,  with  their  princes  especially.  Shemaiah,  who,  no 
doubt,  had  spoke  against  their  idolatrous  courses  before,  lakea 
his  season  when  they  were  low  and  tamed,  and  tells  them  the 
true  cause  of  their  misery.  (Ver.  o.)  Mony  sins  there  we 
the  land,  as  idolatry,  and  whoredoms,  etc.;  yet  the  venom 
"  They  had  forsaien  Ihe  Lord."  Let  the  sin  be  what  it  will  ba^  1 

yet  let  it  be  such  a  one  as  men  forsake  the  Lord  by  it,  that  is 
the  provocalion  ;  hereupon  ihey  humble  iheroselves,  some  cfFect- 
uftlly,  some  hypocrilically,  yet  nil  outwardly,  niid  say  the  Lord 
is  righleous ;  they  extenuate  not  their  sin,  ihey  ky  not  the 
Dame  on  man,  no,  not  on  Shishak,  but  see  ihc  Lord,  justify  his 
proceeilings  :  The  Lord  k  righteous,  we  unrighteous,  ■lihough  it 
were  more  heavy  than  it  is. 

Now,  in  the  seventh  verse,  and  in  the  words  read,  Is  set  (town 
the  mitigation  of  God'a  plague,  and  the  moderation  of  his  chas- 
tisement, "  I  will  not  pour  out  all  my  wrath,"  yet  I  think  it  not 
fit  to  show  perfect  deliverance,  "  I  will  make  them  servants,  to 
let  them  know,'*  etc- 

There  are  two  parts  in  the  words  read ;  — 

1.  The  punishment  or  chastisement  on  Judab  for  forsaking 
the  Lord,  and  backsliding  from  him,  which  is  bondage  and 
privation  of  the   liberty   ibey   had  —  they  most    be    Shishak '» 

2.  The   Lord's  end  ;   it  was  very  gracious  —  "  that  they  may 
know  my  service,"  etc. 
For  explication. 

1.  Wliat  is  meant  by  service  ? 

Atu.  There  are  two  things  in  service :  1.  Government.  2. 
Subjection  ;  cheerful  obedience  to  that  government.  Both  the 
Hebrew  word,  as  also  the  nature  of  the  thmg  itself,  hath  these 

God  sets  up  his  government  over  a  people  ;  his  people  do  or 
should  subject  cheerfully  to  this  government.  By  my  service  is 
therefore  meant  my  government,  and  your  subjection  wrought 
by  me  to  this  government, 

2.  "  They  shall  know,"  1.  Not  by  the  knowledge  of  the  brain, 
for  that  they  know  now,  but  knowledge  of  experience,  as  it  is 
said  in  Ezek.  vi.  ult. :  "When  I  shall  have  made  the  land  deso- 
kte  in  all  their  habitations,  Ihey  shall  know  that  I  am  the  Lord," 
Now,  what  shall  they  know  of  it  ? 

Ant.  The  dift'erence  between  them,  the  sorrow  of  the  one, 
the  sweet  of  the  other  ;  the  misery  of  the  one,  and  blessedness 
of  the  other  ;  the  bondage  of  the  one,  and  the  liberty  of  the 

There  might  be  many  things  observed  from  the  words,  bat  I 
note  only  the  general. 

Oluer.  That  when  any  people  of  God  forsake  the  Lord,  and 
cast  off  his  government  over  them,  they  provoke  the  Lord  to 
put  them  under  the  bondage  of  another  government.  They 
that  abuse  God's  liberty  must  be  under  bondage ;  the  Lord  hath 



«  kingdom  in  this  world  most  glorioux ;  hence,  when  men  will 
not  be  under  it,  if  they  will  Dot  be  ruled  bjr  him,  they  must  be 
ruled  by  the  whip ;  and  if  ChrJst'a  lawa  CAn  not  bind,  Christ's 
chains  must.  Jer.  v.  19,  "And  it  slisll  come  to  pass  when  ye 
ghall  say,  Wherefore  doth  rhe  Lord  all  lliese  things  unto  uB  ? 
then  shall  lliou  answer  them,  Like  as  ye  have  forsaken  me, 
and  served  strange  gods  in  your  laud,  eo  shall  ye  aerre  strangers 
in  a  laud  that  is  not  yours."  Ps.  cvii.  10,  11,  "Such  ae  sit  in 
darkness  and  in  the  shadow  of  tloath,  being  bound  in  affliction 
and  iron,  because  they  rebelled  against  the  words  of  God,  and 
contemned  the  counsel  of  the  Most  High."  £zek.  xx.  24,  25, 
"  fiecause  they  had  not  executed  my  judgments,  but  had  de- 
spised my  statutes,  and  polluted  my  Sabbatlis,  etc.  Wherefore  I 
gitve  them  also  statutes  thai  were  not  good,  and  judgments, 
whereby  they  should  not  live,"  etc.  Zech,  xi.  15,  IG,  "And 
ihe  Lord  said  unUi  me.  Take  unto  thee  yet  the  instrument!  of 
a  foolish  shepherd.  For  lo,  I  will  raise  up  a  shepherd  in 
the  land,  which  shall  not  visit  those  that  be  cut  off,  nor  seek 
the  young  one,  nor  heal  that  that  b  broken,  nor  feed  that  that 
eiandcth  siill,"  etc. 

When  people  break  covenant  with  God,  and  loathe  him,  then 
saith  the  Lord,  1  will  not  feed,  and  then  be  sets  over  them  Idol 

Thin  is  cerluin :  when  the  soul  will  not  subject  itself  U>  God, 
he  goes  about  to  subject  God  to  him,  nay,  lo  his  lusts.  Is.  xliii. 
24,  "  Thou  hast  made  me  to  serve  with  thy  sins."  For  one  of 
them  mu^t  stoop,  and  d  man  would  have  the  Lord  bo  merciful, 
pmiunl,  and  pitiful  to  him,  when  he  is  in  league  with  his  luits; 
(luw,  this  the  Lord  will  not  do.  And  hence,  if  he  does  not 
dcKtniy  him,  ho  withdraws  himself  from  serving  of  the  creature, 
and  hence  other  evils  take  hold  of  it,  and  bring  it  under.  liVlien 
Adnm  stood  and  viixs  for  God,  all  creatures  served  him,  and  the 
riches  of  God'a  goodness  preserved  him,  the  Lord  communicated 
the  tweel  of  his  government  or  service  to  him  ;  but  wheu  turned 
away  from  the  right  wajs  of  God,  now,  if  the  Lord  should 
serve  him  by  governing  of  him  in  goodness,  he  should  serve  a 
lust,  tuid  bow  to  the  creature,  nay,  to  a  lust;  which  is  a  viler 
thing  than  for  one  creature  to  fall  down  and  worship  another. 
Ihcrefore,  now,  hence  it  comes  to  pass,  because  the  Lord  will  not 
l>c  a  servant  to  any  man's  luat,  there  must  he  some  other  govern- 
ment that  must  seize  upon  them.  Hence  set  all  the  saints  in  the 
churches  with  Ilicir  faces  subjecte<I  lo  the  Lord,  his  good  will 
and  righteous  ways,  and  then  his  goodness  shall  tlow  down  upon 
llicm  in  and  tbruugh  Christ ;  for  utlterwisc  we  liuvo  nothing  lo  do 




with  good,  but  when  we  are  set  riglil  for  God.  Hos.  ii.  19, 
"  I  will  betroth  thee  unto  me  forever,  yen,  I  wil!  betrolh  ihee  unto 
me  in  righteousness,  in  judgment,  in  loriDg  liindness,  and  mercy," 
etc  The  Lord  will  then  command  all  crcaturcB  U>  be  aerviccable 
to  hifl  church  and  people.  (Ver2l,22.)  But  on  the  conirary, 
miHeiy  muat  needs  seize  upon  the  soul  that  doth  cast  off  the 
govemmeot  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  Thus  much  for  the  general 
espUcation  of  the  point.     Now,  in  particular,  — 

1.  Wlial  u  this  government  or  serTice  of  God? 

2.  What  is  that  bondage  he  captivates  his  unto? 

3.  Why  doth  the  Lord  do  thus  ? 

Que>.  1.  What  is  this  government  or  service  of  God  which 
being  shaken  off  the  Lord  gives  ihcm  over  to  bondage  ? 

Aiit.  There  is  a  double  government  of  the    Lord   over  hia 

1.  Internal  or  inward,  of  which  our  Saviour  speaks.  (Luke 
ivii.  21.)  The  kingdom  of  God  {saith  Christ)  conies  not  by 
observation  and  outward  pomp ;  "  For  behold  the  kingdom  of 
God  is  within  you."  And  this  is  nothing  else  in  general,  but 
when  the  Lord  doth  by  his  Spirit  in  the  word  of  his  grace  cause 
the  whole  soul  willingly  to  submit  and  subject  itself  (o  the  whole 
will  of  God  BO  far  as  it  is  made  known  to  it ;  this  is  the  inward 
kingdom  of  God  and  government  of  Christ  in  the  aoul.  Bom.  viii. 
14,  "  So  many  as  are  led  by  the  Spirit  are  the  sons  of  God." 
Ps,  cs.  2,  "  The  Lord  shall  send  the  rod  of  thy  strength  out  of 
Zion,"  etc  2  Cor.  x.  4,  "  For  the  weapons  of  our  warfare  are 
not  carnal,  but  mighty  through  God  to  the  pulling  down  of  strong' 
holds."  Ver.  5,  "  Bringing  into  caplivily  every  thought  to  the 
obedience  of  Christ."  There  are  mighty  boisterous  distempers, 
but  the  Lord,  when  he  comes  in  his  kingdom,  to  sit  upon  the 
royal  throne  of  the  hearts  of  his  people,  now  they  fly  ;  and 
this  is  the  inward  kingdom  of  Christ,  like  a  poor  subject  par- 
doned and  received  to  favor,  he  is  before  the  face  of  the 
prince  continually  attending  on  him.  Rev.  vii.  14, 15,  "These 
■re  they  which  carae  out  of  great  tribulation,  and  have  washed 
their  robes,  and  made  them  white  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb-" 
Ver.  15,  "  Therefore  are  they  before  the  throne  of  God,  and 
serve  him  day  and  night  in  his  temple,"  etc.  Now,  this  is  meant 
in  part  by  God's  service  in  these  days  :  do  you  think  the  Lord 
eared  for  thousands  of  rams  ?  No,  but  to  walk  humbly.  (Mieah 
vi.)  Did  he  care  for  temple  and  ordinances?  No,  but,  (Is.  i 
19,)  "If  ye  be  willing  and  obedient,  ye  shall  eat  the  good  of 
the  land."  Neb.  is.  20,  "  la  these  days  he  gave  them  Us  good 
Spirit  to  instruct  them." 

2.  Extcmul  or  outward,  the  end  and  insligation  of  whtcli  was 
d  help  forwsrd  the  inwnrd ;  for  externtU  ordjaances 
noUiiag  ia  themselves,  n«an  things ;  but  ss  they  are  Bp[>omt- 
ed  and  MBctilied  for  thi«  end,  they  are  Dtost  glonous ;  and  there* 
fur«  Christ  threatens  the  Jews  (Matt,  xxl  43)  that  iho  king- 
dom should  be  taken  from  them.  What  was  that  ?  Surely  not 
inward,  for  that  Ihey  had  not,  but  tlic  outward  and  cxiemol 
means  called  God's  kingdom  ;  all  tlie^e  helps  and  means  shall  ^||l 
taken  from  you.  and  all  laid  ruinous.  Now,  )his  exiernol  king- 1 
dom  of  Christ  is  double.  I 

1 .  The  external  kingdon  or  govemment  of  G!od  by  his  chuigh. 
in  the  administration,  and  execution,  and  eabjectktn  to  the  blesded 
ordinances  of  God,  wherein  the  power  and  kingdom  of  Christ  i 
is  aeeni  and  thus,   (Dan.   ii.   44,   io  ;  vii.  27,)   "It    shall    bel 
given  lo  the  saints  of  the  Most  High,"  etc.     Not  to  profane  herd»  A 
of  beasts  or  cages  of  undean  birds,  but  to  the  sainls  of  the  Slost     I 
High,  whose  kingdom  is  an  everlasting  kingdom,  and  all  the      \ 
printvs  of  liie  woM  shall  sulyect  themselves  to  this  kingdom       \ 
of  Christ  V 

This  outward  kingdom  Christ  admin i«tercth  amongst  his  ) 
[leoplc  in  thid  world  :  and  this  was  pari  of  the  Lord's  govern-  / 
ment  over  his  people  herein,  though  various  from  our  form  noy,   / 

2.  Of  the  commonwealth  which  may  have  divers  forms,  and   1 
liad  in  ibe  lime  of  Israel ;  but  it  receiving  its  law  from  God  and   \ 
governing  fur  God,  hence  it  was  tire  government  of  God,  and 
aiibjcption    hereunto  was   subjection   and   service   to  God  him- 
self./ And  hence,  when  the  people  cast  off  Samuel,  (1  Sam.  viiL 
7,)    "  They    have   not  rejected   thee,  but   me."     Rev. 
*'  The  kingdoms  of  the  world  are  become  the  kingdoms  of  our 
Lord  and  of  his  ChrisI,  and  he  shall  reign  forever  and 
l-'or  nlihough  ihe  commonwealth  of  Israel  was  made  up  of  the 
church,  and  hence  Jusephus  calls  it  a  theocracy,  where  the  Lord 
governed,  and  yet  the  same  thing  had  divers  foif,  forms  and 
n-spects,  and  hence  there  was  a  diverse  government  then,  and 
faence   made  diverse.    2  Chron.  xix.  5,8,   "  Jehoshaphat  sets 
Judge*  in  the  land  throughout  all  the  fenmd  cities."     Such  is  the 
wildnesB,  holitnesg,  and  carelessness  of  men's  hearts,  that  they  do 
not  only  need  laws,  but  watchmen  over  them,  10  see  they  be 
kept :  and  hence  ibe  Lord  appointed  some  chief,  some  judges  in 
every  ciiy,  and  also  some  in  every  village,  as  by  proportion  may 
t>o  gathered,  (Ex.  xviii. ;)  every  ten  men  hod  one  over  them. 

Now,  this  wa*  the  blessed  wisilom  of  God  to  put  all  into  sweet 
•ubordinalion  one  unto  another  for  himself. 

1.  Everyone  professing  his  name  la  made  for  God, for  Cbriat, 
VOL.  iti  23 


our      ^1 



a  Lord  of  lords,  unto  whom  every  knee  must  bow,"  and  lo' 
wardly  subject. 

2.  IIcDC^  the  Lord  (it  being  not  good  to  leave  man  to  bim- 
Beir)  erects  a  kingdom  of  tbe  cbiirch,  with  his  own  power  and 
RUthority,  and  goTernment  in  it  for  tbat  end. 

3.  Tids  being  poor  and  sbiftless  ogainat  inward  and  outwai-d 
revenge,  hence  tbe  Lord  sets  up  kingdoms  of  the  world,  which 
either  rule  for  this  end,  or  these  ends,  or  not.  If  tbej  do  not,  the; 
are  to  answer  it,  and  shall  one  day  to  Christ,  "  whom  God 
liath  made  head  over  all  things  to  the  church."  (Eph.  i.  22.)  If  . 
they  do,  then  their  government,  judgment,  and  kingdom  ie  the 
Lord's  in  a  special  manner ;  and  hence  break  the  yoke  of  sub- 
jection to  any  one  of  these,  you  cast  off  Christ,  the  Lord's  gov- 
ernment and  service  ;  and  being  so  linked  together,  in  truth  if  you 
break  one  you  breuk  all,  and  this  will  provoke  the  Lord  to  make 
you  kiss  the  clink,  and  to  put  your  necks  under  iron  bondage 
that  refuse  subjection  to  him. 

Quet.  2.  What  is  tbat  bondage  or  other  goverumenl  to  which 
the  Lord  gives  over  his  people  when  they  have  cast  off  his  gov- 
ernment: this  will  provoke  the  Lord  if  the  Lord  be  cast  off,  and 
the  casting  off  the  government  of  Christ  will  bring  tbe  most 
famous  kingdoms,  churches,  and  families  into  bondage:  you  wiil 
say.  What  is  this  bondage  ?  When  is  it  that  the  Lord  takes  his 
season  for  the  execution  of  it  ? 

^n*.  1.  The  Lord  lakes  his  own  times  to  do  it;  these  were  a 
twelvemonth  before  the  Lord  sent  Shishak,  Here  he  was  more 
quick.  Nebuchudnezzar  comes  at  last,  and  many  years  it  is  be- 
fore the  Lord  doth  iL 

2.  The  Lord  is  various  in  working;  as  he  is  wonderful  and 
hath  divers  ways  or  means  of  bondage,  he  hath  more  prisons  and 
chains  than  one. 

1.  Sometimes  the  Lord  opens  the  door  of  a  kingdom  or  stale 
for  the  inroad  of  some  foreign,  or  it  may  be  barbarous  enemy, 
breaking  in  sometimes  by  power,  coming  in  sometimes  by  craft, 
and  then  ruling  like  lions,  which  the  Lord  makes  to  vex  and 
prick  the  people  of  God  ;  thus  here  their  lives  were  spared,  but 
Bberties  lost.  Thus,  Judg.  ii.  13,  14,  »  They  forsook  the  Lord, 
and  served  Baal  and  Ashtarolb  ; "  and  in  verse  14,"  The  anger 
of  tbe  Lord  waxed  hot  again»>t  Israel,  and  he  delivered  them  into 
the  hands  of  spoilers  that  spoiled  tliem."  Ver.  15,  "  Wbiiber- 
■oever  they  went  out,  tbe  hand  of  the  Lord  was  against  them 
for  evil."  And  this  the  Lord  doth  many  times  suddenly,  that 
one  would  never  think  that  ever  the  Lord  should  be  so  sudden  ; 
the  Lord  can  bo  as  quick  to  punish  as  man  to  sin,  and  that 


VOR  Jl 

unexpectedly.     £cd.  ix.  12,  "Mnn  knows  not  his  time,  but  is 
Inken  like  lisli  in  an  eril  net  suddenly."     Lam.  iv.  12,  "The 
kin^loniK  of  the  earth,  and  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  world, 
not  have  believed."     Judg.  v.  8,  "  They  set  i 
war  was  in  the  gate^" 

2,  Sornetimea  the  Lord  turns  ibe  edge  of  that  lawful  authority 
God  hath  set  over  them  against  ih^mselTes,  lo  be  a  heavy 
scour;^  from  God  upon  ihem.  Thus  it  was  with  Israel  in  Egypt,  . 
(Ex.  i.  8,  9  ;)  there  arose  n  king  which  knew  not  Joseph,  and 
it  is  said  then  they  were  oppressed.  Thus  Jeroboam,  whom  the 
ten  tribes  chose,  (Hoa.  v.  11,)  he  oppressed  the  people,  he  will 
be  innovating,  and  this  becomes  their  oppression.  Thus  the 
people  under  the  reign  of  degenerate  Solomon,  (tliough  their 
complaint  might  foe  in  part  unjust.)  Such  is  the  venom  of  sin 
and  unsubduedness  to  the  kingdom  of  God,  that  the  Lord  turns 
light  into  darkness,  and  makes  ua  aching  head  nuitter  of  sorrow 
to  all  the  stale  and  body  of  people.  Eccl.  x.  16,  "  Woe  to  thee, 
O  land,  when  thy  king  is  a  child."  And  one  man  shall  do  a 
world  of  hurt,  one  Shebna  or  Amaziah,  and  this  the  l^rd  doUi 
in  justice  many  limes'for  casting  off  his  government./^ 

9.  Sometimes  the  Lord  gives  a  people  up  into  ihe  bands  of 
one  another  tu  be  mutual  oppressors  of  each  other,  that  a  man's 
neighbor  shall  be  his  oppressor.  Zecb.  xi.  9,  "  I  will  piiy  no 
more  the  inhabitants  of  the  land,  I  will  deliver  them  every  one 
into  bis  neighbor's  hands.  I  will  feed  you  no  more  ;  that  which 
dieth  let  it  die,  and  tliat  which  is  cut  off  let  it  bo  cut  off,  and  let 
Ihe  rest  eat  every  one  the  flesh  of  another."  Sometimes  the  Lord 
is  pleased  losendmarvelousslraics  into  a  place,  that  men  are  forced 
lo  imbondagc  ibemeelves  sometimes  by  words  as  bitter  as  death, 
as  sharp  as  arrows ;  the  Lord  is  pleased,  for  the  forsaking  of  his 
righteous  ways,  lo  moke  a  man's  aclf  rip  his  own  bowels,  the  father 
agninst  the  child,  the  mast«r  shall  be  a  scourge  to  the  servant, 
and  llie  servant  shall  be  a  scourge  lo  his  master,  weary  him  of 
liis  life,  the  government  of  the  Lord  iit  a  man's  heart  or  family 
being  cast  off;  (Micah  viL4,  u,)  "  Trust  not  in  a  friend."  No  great* 
er  bondage  in  the  world  than  for  men  jirofcssiog  the  Lord  lo  be 
desperately  set  one  against  another. 

4.  By  taking  from  a  people  all  that  righteous  power  of  gov- 
ernment the  Lord  hulb  set  over  them,  when  a  jieople  despising 
the  Lord  and  inward  government  first,  (for  there  all  begins,)  and 
so  not  prizing  what  they  have,  nor  praying  for  them,  nor  sub- 
jecting to  them,  the  Lord  hereupon  sends  some  sickness,  or  som« 
other  evil,  that  tliey  are  either  suddenly  taken  away,  or  gradu- 
ally;   and   when   they  ore  gone,  all  smk,  or  else  such   cruM 




492  ,      A  wnoLKsosiE  caveat 

CRmagefi,  tbnt  as  Moses  said,  so  s.iylhfj,  "Icnnnot  bear  this  pro- 
pie."  Thus,  (Judg.  xxi.  25.)  "  Hen  did  ntmt  was  riglit  in  iheir 
own  eyes  nben  iLere  naa  no  Iting  in  Israel."  No  slnle  so  niiser- 
-able  OS  an  aosn^iy,  ivties  erety  one  k  a  slave,  because  ereiy 
one  will  be  a  miisler.  Thw,  (Is.  iii.  I,  2,  E.)  "  Be  a  rnler 
tons."  No,  I  will  not  imdertiiie  to  mle.  So  (?Cliron.  xt.  3, 5) 
when  ivilltoDt  a  leaching  priest, then  no  peace  at  ft)],  men  vrill  not 
be  under  govemnient  of  them,  jou  shall  not  have  theia,  they 
shall  rest  in  pem^,  and  you  shall  then  knon  the  nant  of  iliem. 

5,  By  giving  them  over  to  Satan's  and  iheir  own  hearts'  lusts, 
Ihat  seeing  they  will  not  serve  the  Lord,  ihey  shall  serve  their 
lusts  and  Iheir  sine,  tlmt  now  the  Lord  he  hath  left  df  chnstising 
of  men,  nnd  conscience  shall  check  no  more,  prosper,  saith  the 
Lord,  and  go  on  in  thy  sin.  Fs.  Ixxsi.  12,  "  So  I  gave  them 
up  to  their  own  hearts'  lasts,  and  they  walked  after  their  owit 
counsels."  Rev.  xxii.  II,  "Let  him  that  h  lilihy  be  filthy 

When  the  Lord  shall  give  a  man  over  U>  Satan,  not  only  to 
winnow  him,  lo  let  out  the  ciiatf,  and  so  to  make  the  grain  the 
purer,  or  to  butfet  tliem  as  he  did  Paul,  bbt  lo  insnare  them,  and 
hold  them,  that  he  shall  not  only  tempt,  btit  his  temptations  sliali 
lake,  and  not  only  lake,  but  holds  (2  Tina.  ii.  ull.)  "who  arc 
taken  captive  by  bim  at  hia  will ;"  taken  alive  as  a  snare  doth, 
that  now  a  man  is  beyond  the  reach  of  all  means,  only  peradven- 
tlire  Grod  may  give  repentance ;  (Is.  i.  5,)  "  Why  should  ye  be 
stricken  any  more?  ye  will  revolt  yet  more  and  more."  The 
Lord  leaves  smiling  nnd  says.  Go  on  and  prosper  in  thy  sin ;  and, 
which  is  the  worst  of  all,  Satan  shaLI  so  blind  him  and  lianlen  him, 
fill  him  wilh  pride,  passion,  lying,  hatred  of  Uod's  people,  cavil- 
ing against  the  Lord's  ways  of  grace,  shghting  of  his  belters, 
despising  of  wholesome  counsel  from  his  dearest  friends,  that  he 
knows  not  that  gray  hairs  are  upon  him.  And  after  this,  when 
God  Imth  cast  out,  it  nuty  be  the  church  doih  also,  a  most  fearful 
bcmdage  that  the  Lord  gives  snch  a  soul  over  unin. 

There  arc  two  roasona  of  tliis  point  which  I  c«Ucct  only  from 
the  story  in  this  chapter. 

Jieaion  I.  In  regard  o£  the  righteous  judgment  of  God.  It 
it  just  and  equal  that  ho  that  will  not  lie  ruled  by  this  blessed 
Lord  Jesus,  he  sliould  be  ruled  by  his  luets  ;  he  that  will  not  be 
in  subjection  to  a  merciful  Christ,  he  slkould  be  in  bondage  to 
Unmerriful  men  :  this  a  humbled  Iteitrl  wiU  acknowlei^e,  as  these 
do  here.  ( Ver.  G.)  Tlii^y  ai'knawledged  the  Lord  10  be  rigUleous- 
Man  being  fallen,  it  had  lieen  righteous  with  (iod  to  have  left  all 
men  as  the  angels  that  fell  in  chaina  of  darkness  forever.     But 

among  his  church  and  people  tlic  Lord  sends  the  gospel  to  pro- 
cliiim  liberty,  and  with  it  sends  Christ  with  his  Spirit,  to  come  (o 
the  prison  doors  of  poor  sinners,  to  give  rcpe'nlonce  as  well  aa 
remission  of  sins ;  and  oow,  if  Ihey  will  not  come  out  of  their 
bondage,  accept  of  the  Lord's  Uberly,  it  is  exceeding  righteous  to 
deal  with  them  as  we  do  with  prisoners  condemned  to  die  ;  if  the 
prince  comes  to  the  prison  doors,  and  says,  I  am  come  to  give  thee 
thy  life,  nay,  and  here  is  pardon,  nay,  favor,  and  lo  pull  off  thy 
cbains  also  ;  now,  if  he  says,  No,  I  had  rather  be  in  prison,  every 
one  will  say  it  is  just,  and  as  it  was  in  the  year  of  jubilee,  he  lliat 
would  not  go  free  was  to  be  a  bondman  forever.  It  is  very 
righteous  to  give  men  tlicir  own  choice ;  it  is  no  wrong  to  let  them 
hove  their  own  will:  if,  indeed,  the  laws  of  Christ  were  Draco's 
laws,  hard  and  heavy,  there  were  something  to  object;  but  they 
are  most  sweet,  and  for  which  of  all  other  blessings  men  have 
cause  to  bless  him.  (Ps.  cxlvii.  utt.) 

Reatvn  2.  In  regard  of  the  mercy  or  merciful  wisdom  of  the 
Lord  toward  his  church  and  people,  especially  his  peculiar  ones, 
that  hereby  they  keep  the  closer  lo  tlic  Lord,  set  a  higher  price 
u[>on  the  rules  and  govemmenl  of  the  Lord,  love  his  kingdom  the 
more,  and  the  liberties  thereof,  and  use  them  belter  when  they 
have  them  again,  so  here,  "  that  they  may  know  my  service,"  etc 

1.  How  sweet  it  is.  Experience,  we  say,  is  the  mistress  of 
fools ;  such  is  the  foolishness  of  men's  hearts  that  men  are  many 
limes  never  truly  taught  a  truth  till  they  arc  taught  it  by  sense, 
(Prov-  V.  11,)  "and  ihou  mourn  at  lost  when  thy  fiesh  is  con- 
sumed :  "  tell  a  man  of  all  the  glory  of  the  saints,  they  never  un- 
derstand it  till  they  feel  it ;  tell  men  of  the  woe  of  their  ways, 
they  will  not  believe  it  till  they  see  it.  Ps.  xxxii.  9,  "  Be  not 
as  the  horse  or  mule,  that  hath  no  understanding,  whose  month 
must  be  held  in  with  hit  and  bridle."  IIos.  x.  1 1,  "  Ephraim  ia 
like  a  heifer  that  ts  laughu"  Like  untamed  horses  that  will 
cast  their  rider,  unless  they  be  held  under  and  backed,  and  then 
they  are  gentle,  so  it  is  here  ;  and  truly  it  is  long  before  a  man 
can  learn  the  sweet  of  Christ's  government :  hence  Israel  must 
be  long  in  Egyptian  bondage,  and  many  long  miseries,  go  that,  if 
there  be  either  justice  or  mercy  in  the  Lord,  he  will  do  this,  and 
this  point  shall  be  true. 

Cm  I.  /  Hence,  then,  see  that  the  greatest  liberty  anil  sweet-  ', 
est  liberty  is  to  be  under  the  government  of  Christ  Jesus,  although 
men  do  not  think  so  ^hence  the  Lord  tells  thera  here  "  they  shall 
know  my  service : "  they  might  have  replied.  We  do  know  it.  No, " 
till  they  be  in  bonds  tliey  know  it  not,  cor  can  not  learn  it.  So 
it  is  now;  and  bencv,  let  men  observe  while  they  live  loosely,  and 




e  guided  by  their  own  wisdom,  for  their  own  ends,  according 
I  to  tbeir  own  will,  Bt  pera  riven  I  urea,  at  rovers,  bb  they  please, 
Ihey  do  think  this  liberty  very  sweet ;  and  il  is  beller  than  to  be 
curbed  in.  But  let  (be  I.ord  strike  an  arrow  id  the  lienrt  of 
these  wild  bucks  that  have  broke  park  and  pale,  send  affliction 
and  an  iron  yoke  of  sorrow  upon  lliem,  or  distress  of  conscience, 
if  there  be  any  sense  and  feeling  left,  they  will  bemoan  them- 
selves, and  say.  I  did  ihink  my  liberty  sweet,  but  now  I  see  it  is 
bitter  in  a  sinful  way :  und  the  Lord's  way  was  most  sweet,  by 
their  own  confession.  Hence,  (Ps.  ii.  3.)  "  Let  us  break  their 
bands,"  etc.  But  O.  now  hence  learn  this  truth,  and  digest  it 
thoroughly,  that  the  greatest  liberty  lies  here.  Do  not,  in  thy 
■  judgment,  think  Christian  liberty  liea  in  being  freed  from  the 
law  as  a  rule  of  obedience  in  respect  of  the  matter  of  it  to  bo 

ft  thousand  sori-Qws  with  it  and  griefs,  yet  it  is  sweet.     Christ's 

"  yoke  (Matt.  xi.  SO.)  is  easy,  and  hia  burden  light."    What,  when 

not  a  bole  to  hide  his  head  in,  wb^n  a  reproach  of  men,  a  worm 

gnd  no  man,  when  he  bore  the  Fatlier's  wrath  ?     Yes,  when  he 

r  iras  meek  under  it,  {"  Not  mine,  but  thy  will  be  done,")   it  was 

Ir  then  most  sweet.     1  Kings  ix.  21,  22,  To  be  a  servtuit  to  Sol- 

.  omon  is  do  bondage.     Ps.  cxix.  32,  "  I  will  ruu,  when  thou  shalt 

enlarge  ray  heart." 

Ute  2,     Hence  see  the  reason  why  the  Lord  hath  deprived 
,  his  churches  of  their  liberty,  and  his  government  over  tliem  at 
I  randry  times,  and  hatli  put  them  under  iron  yokes  and  bonds,  and 
'i  sore  pressures  :  the  reason  is  shown  ;  they  have  either  openly  or 
I  jnore